DOCSLIB.ORG

Photon-Tagged Jet Fragmentation Functions and Jet Shapes in Pp and Pbpb Collisions with the CMS Detector

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Photon-Tagged Jet Fragmentation Functions and Jet Shapes in Pp and Pbpb Collisions with the CMS Detector Photon-tagged jet fragmentation functions and jet shapes in pp and PbPb collisions with the CMS detector Kaya Tatar Massachusetts Institute of Technology for the CMS Collaboration Hard Probes 2018, Aix-Les-Bains, France October 2, 2018 Kaya Tatar 1 Hard Probes 2018 Introduction Study modification of parton shower JHEP 05 (2018) 006 Gives info about the dynamics of hot QCD matter Tools : Jet fragmentation function (FF) ● Longitudinal distribution of momentum Jet shapes (JS) ● Distribution of jet energy in transverse direction FF and JS provide different, but complementary info jet r EPJC 77 (2017) 379 p p / b P p h b z ~ T P p jet T z Kaya Tatar 2 Hard Probes 2018 Inclusive jet vs photon+jet γ Photon+jet Inclusive jet Photon-tag controls initial state Compares samples with different initial states Produced partons : quark fraction enhanced Produced partons : mix of quarks and gluons -- > Probe quark jet modification -- > Insight for gluon modification when combined with inclusive jet PRC 90 (2014) 024908 Enhancement Depletion (high ξ – > low-p particle) T arXiv:1809.08602 Kaya Tatar 3 Hard Probes 2018 Observables : ξjet ● Take tracks (charged particles) inside the jet cone. ● Project the track momentum to jet axis. γ ● Divide jet momentum by the projected track momentum. ● The natural log of this ratio is called ξjet. : 3-momentum vector of the jet : 3-momentum vector of the track ● Based on final jet energy (after quenching) ● Measured previously using inclusive jets projected to jet axis Kaya Tatar 4 Hard Probes 2018 γ Observables : ξT ● Take tracks (charged particles) inside the jet cone. ● Construct transverse momentum vectors for track and photon γ ● Invert the track transverse momentum ● Follow the same logic as for ξjet. : transverse momentum vector of the photon : transverse momentum vector of the track ● Based on photon energy ● Measured for the first time for reconstructed jets - projected to axis Kaya Tatar 5 Hard Probes 2018 Object Selections Photons Jets Tracks JHEP 04 (2017) 039 γ p > 60 GeV/c trk T anti-kT, R=0.3 pT > 1 GeV/c γ |η | < 1.44 jet pT > 30 GeV/c ΔR(jet, track) < 0.3 |ηjet| < 1.6 Bkg tracks subtracted via MB event mixing Δφ(photon, jet) > 7π /8 inclusive jets, bkg jets subtracted via MB event mixing γ Background sources Tracks from underlying event (UE) –> Subtracted via Min Bias event mixing Mis-identified (fake) jets –> Subtracted via Min Bias event mixing photons from neutral meson decays rejected using shower shape cut, remaining bkg fraction estimated via template fit Kaya Tatar 6 Hard Probes 2018 Background subtraction for tracks arXiv:1801.04895 isolated-photon+jet event Raw tracks γ inside jet cone MB event Bkg tracks inside jet cone γ Raw – Bkg (Bkg track subtracted) Kaya Tatar 7 Hard Probes 2018 jet γ arXiv:1801.04895 Results : ξ vs ξT ξjet ● Based on reconstructed jet energy (energy after quenching) Kaya Tatar 8 Hard Probes 2018 jet γ arXiv:1801.04895 Results : ξ vs ξT jet γ ξ ξT ● Based on reconstructed jet energy (energy after quenching) ● Based on photon energy ● jet γ shifted to left compared to ξ ξT ● Out-of-cone radiation, photon+multijet Kaya Tatar 9 Hard Probes 2018 jet γ arXiv:1801.04895 Results : ξ vs ξT jet γ ξ ξT Transition at jet ≈ 2.5 and γ ≈ 3 –> p trk ≈ 3 GeV ξ ξT T Central PbPb collisions – > enhancement of low-p particles and a depletion of high-p particles T T γ modified stronger compared to jet ξT ξ Kaya Tatar 10 Hard Probes 2018 jet γ arXiv:1801.04895 ξ and ξT vs Theory SCET (JHEP 11 (2016) 155) G Hybrid (JHEP 1410 (2014) 019, JHEP 1603 (2016) 053 ) ● Weak coupling : high-Q² processes using pQCD ● Framework decomposing Soft Collinear and Glabuer models ● Strong coupling : low-Q² interactions between CoLBT-hydro (Phys. Lett. B, 777 (2018) 86) parton shower and medium ● Couples LBT for jet evolution with (3+1)D hydrodynamics ● Weak and strong coupling are combined ● Combines pQCD approach with hydro simulation of medium Turnover at jet ≈ 2.5 and γ ≈ 3 –> p trk ≈ 3 GeV ξ ξT T Large enhancement from particles after turnover -- > Models tend to underpredict this -- > Medium response important for CoLBT and Hybrid Other ingredients considered by theory ● Medium-induced radiation ● Effects of medium on hadronization Kaya Tatar 11 Hard Probes 2018 γ-tagged jet shape arXiv:1809.08602 ρ(r) normalized to unity over r < 0.3 Results are corrected for detector resolution, particle reco. pp results are NOT smeared Central PbPb collisions – > a larger fraction of jet energy at large distances from the jet axis. Kaya Tatar 12 Hard Probes 2018 inclusive vs γ-tagged jet shape JHEP 05 (2018) 006 arXiv:1809.08602 Inclusive jets 3 2 ρ(r) normalized to unity over r < 1.0 (inclusive jets) Enhancement r < 0.3 (γ+jet) 1 Depletion SCET [JHEP 05 (2016) 023] γ+jet : G Larger enhancement at large r. Smaller depletion at intermediate r. LBT [Phys. Lett. B, 782 (2018) 707] ● Increased quark fraction (70-80%) ? Models describe data well. ● Lower jet p threshold (higher fraction of quenched jets) ? T Kaya Tatar 13 Hard Probes 2018 Summary ● FF and jet shapes (JS) measured for jets tagged with isolated-photons. – Constrains the initial parton kinematics and probes quark-jet modification. ● FF modification – > excess of low-pT particles and depletion of high-pT particles inside the jet cone. – FF observable wrt photon energy – > robust measurement, larger modification ● JS modification – > a larger fraction of jet energy is carried at large distances from the jet axis. – No large depletion at intermediate distances. ● Models seem to describe both longitudinal and transverse jet structure. arXiv:1801.04895 arXiv:1809.08602 Acknowledgements : The MIT group's work was supported by US DOE-NP. Kaya Tatar 14 Hard Probes 2018 BACKUP Kaya Tatar 15 Hard Probes 2018 Inclusive jet shape JHEP 05 (2018) 006 ρ(r) normalized to unity over r < 1. 3 2 Enhancement 1 Depletion Kaya Tatar 16 Hard Probes 2018 Inclusive jet shape Phys. Lett. B 730 (2014) 243 Kaya Tatar 17 Hard Probes 2018 Bkg subtraction for jets γ Raw jets (bkg track subtracted) MB event Bkg jets (bkg track subtracted) γ Raw – Bkg (bkg track and bkg jet subtracted) Kaya Tatar 18 Hard Probes 2018 Analysis – bkg photons ● Observables are constructed using photons, jets and tracks. Neutral meson decay h0 ->γγ Phys. Lett. B 785 (2018) 14 Background source photons from neutral meson decays ● rejected with shower shape cut ● 2 photons are reconstruced as single with a wider shower shape prompt ● dominates the sideband region : 0.011 < σ < 0.017 ηη + h0 ->γγ h0 ->γγ Energy weighted width of shower : σ ηη shower shape Kaya Tatar 19 Hard Probes 2018 Background from photons ● σηη < 0.01 selects narrow shower shape, supresses background from neutral meson decays, however there is still contamination. ● Purity = fraction of the prompt photons among candidates – Estimated using template fit method. Fit the distribution for σηη < 0.01 with Signal (prompt photon) template from MC with isolated photon events arXiv:1801.04895 Bkg (neutral meson) template from non-isolated photons in data Phys. Lett. B 785 (2018) 14 s e i r t n isolated E non-isolated Σ iso = 2R (tot energy in a cone of R=0.4 around the photon) - (ave. energy from a strip of 2π x 2R) 2π Kaya Tatar 20 Hard Probes 2018 Smearing jet spectra ● Jet energy resolution and jet angular resolution JINST 12 (2017) P10003 differ between pp and PbPb due to underlying event – Estimate relative resolution between pp and PbPb using simulations – Smear jet spectra in pp using this relative resolution ● Smearing jet energy – Parametrize jet energy resolution via RECO 2 2 pT 2 S N σ = C + + pGEN pGEN ( pGEN)2 ( T ) √ T T – Fit C, S and N parameters and apply relative resolution via (S2 −S2 ) (N 2 −N 2 ) σ = (C 2 −C2 )+ PbPb pp + PbPb pp rel PbPb pp pGEN ( pGEN )2 √ T T ● Smearing jet azimuthal angle 2 2 – Use same parametrization as in jet energy RECO GEN 2 S N σ (|φ −φ |)= C + + resolution pGEN (pGEN )2 √ T T – Apply relative resolution in the same fashion Kaya Tatar 21 Hard Probes 2018 γ-tagged jet FF - ξjet arXiv:1801.04895 : 3-momentum vector of the jet : 3-momentum vector of the track Kaya Tatar 22 Hard Probes 2018 γ arXiv:1801.04895 γ-tagged jet FF - ξT : transverse mom. vector of the photon : transverse mom. vector of the track Kaya Tatar 23 Hard Probes 2018 γ-tagged jet shape arXiv:1809.08602 ρ(r) normalized to unity over r < 0.3. Results are corrected for detector resolution, particle reco. pp results are NOT smeared. Kaya Tatar 24 Hard Probes 2018 γ-tagged jet shape : pp vs MC arXiv:1809.08602 Kaya Tatar 25 Hard Probes 2018.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Jet Quenching in Quark Gluon Plasma: flavor Tomography at RHIC and LHC by the CUJET Model
    Jet quenching in Quark Gluon Plasma: flavor tomography at RHIC and LHC by the CUJET model Alessandro Buzzatti Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences Columbia University 2013 c 2013 Alessandro Buzzatti All Rights Reserved Abstract Jet quenching in Quark Gluon Plasma: flavor tomography at RHIC and LHC by the CUJET model Alessandro Buzzatti A new jet tomographic model and numerical code, CUJET, is developed in this thesis and applied to the phenomenological study of the Quark Gluon Plasma produced in Heavy Ion Collisions. Contents List of Figures iv Acknowledgments xxvii Dedication xxviii Outline 1 1 Introduction 4 1.1 Quantum ChromoDynamics . .4 1.1.1 History . .4 1.1.2 Asymptotic freedom and confinement . .7 1.1.3 Screening mass . 10 1.1.4 Bag model . 12 1.1.5 Chiral symmetry breaking . 15 1.1.6 Lattice QCD . 19 1.1.7 Phase diagram . 28 1.2 Quark Gluon Plasma . 30 i 1.2.1 Initial conditions . 32 1.2.2 Thermalized plasma . 36 1.2.3 Finite temperature QFT . 38 1.2.4 Hydrodynamics and collective flow . 45 1.2.5 Hadronization and freeze-out . 50 1.3 Hard probes . 55 1.3.1 Nuclear effects . 57 2 Energy loss 62 2.1 Radiative energy loss models . 63 2.2 Gunion-Bertsch incoherent radiation . 67 2.3 Opacity order expansion . 69 2.3.1 Gyulassy-Wang model . 70 2.3.2 GLV . 74 2.3.3 Multiple gluon emission . 78 2.3.4 Multiple soft scattering .
    [Show full text]
  • Differences Between Quark and Gluon Jets As Seen at LEP 1 Introduction
    UA0501305 Differences between Quark and Gluon jets as seen at LEP Marek Tasevsky CERN, CH-1211 Geneva 28, Switzerland E-mail: [email protected] Abstract The differences between quark and gluon jets are stud- ied using LEP results on jet widths, scale dependent multi- plicities, ratios of multiplicities, slopes and curvatures and fragmentation functions. It is emphasized that the ob- served differences stem primarily from the different quark and gluon colour factors. 1 Introduction The physics of the differences between quark and gluonjets contin- uously attracts an interest of both, theorists and experimentalists. Hadron production can be described by parton showers (successive gluon emissions and splittings) followed by formation of hadrons which cannot be described perturbatively. The gluon emission, being dominant process in the parton showers, is proportional to the colour factor associated with the coupling of the emitted gluon to the emitter. These colour factors are CA = 3 when the emit- ter is a gluon and Cp = 4/3 when it is a quark. Consequently, U6 the multiplicity from a gluon source is (asymptotically) 9/4 higher than from a quark source. In QCD calculations, the jet properties are usually defined in- clusively, by the particles in hemispheres of quark-antiquark (qq) or gluon-gluon (gg) systems in an overall colour singlet rather than by a jet algorithm. In contrast to the experimental results which often depend on a jet finder employed (biased jets), the inclusive jets do not depend on any jet finder (unbiased jets). 2 Results 2.1 Jet Widths As a consequence of the greater radiation of soft gluons in a gluon jet compared to a quark jet, gluon jets are predicted to be broader.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to QCD and Jet I
    Introduction to QCD and Jet I Bo-Wen Xiao Pennsylvania State University and Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University Jet Summer School McGill June 2012 1 / 38 Overview of the Lectures Lecture 1 - Introduction to QCD and Jet QCD basics Sterman-Weinberg Jet in e+e− annihilation Collinear Factorization and DGLAP equation Basic ideas of kt factorization Lecture 2 - kt factorization and Dijet Processes in pA collisions kt Factorization and BFKL equation Non-linear small-x evolution equations. Dijet processes in pA collisions (RHIC and LHC related physics) Lecture 3 - kt factorization and Higher Order Calculations in pA collisions No much specific exercise. 1. filling gaps of derivation; 2. Reading materials. 2 / 38 Outline 1 Introduction to QCD and Jet QCD Basics Sterman-Weinberg Jets Collinear Factorization and DGLAP equation Transverse Momentum Dependent (TMD or kt) Factorization 3 / 38 References: R.D. Field, Applications of perturbative QCD A lot of detailed examples. R. K. Ellis, W. J. Stirling and B. R. Webber, QCD and Collider Physics CTEQ, Handbook of Perturbative QCD CTEQ website. John Collins, The Foundation of Perturbative QCD Includes a lot new development. Yu. L. Dokshitzer, V. A. Khoze, A. H. Mueller and S. I. Troyan, Basics of Perturbative QCD More advanced discussion on the small-x physics. S. Donnachie, G. Dosch, P. Landshoff and O. Nachtmann, Pomeron Physics and QCD V. Barone and E. Predazzi, High-Energy Particle Diffraction 4 / 38 Introduction to QCD and Jet QCD Basics QCD QCD Lagrangian a a a b c with F = @µA @ν A gfabcA A . µν ν − µ − µ ν Non-Abelian gauge field theory.
    [Show full text]
  • Monte Carlo Methods in Particle Physics Bryan Webber University of Cambridge IMPRS, Munich 19-23 November 2007
    Monte Carlo Methods in Particle Physics Bryan Webber University of Cambridge IMPRS, Munich 19-23 November 2007 Monte Carlo Methods 3 Bryan Webber Structure of LHC Events 1. Hard process 2. Parton shower 3. Hadronization 4. Underlying event Monte Carlo Methods 3 Bryan Webber Lecture 3: Hadronization Partons are not physical 1. Phenomenological particles: they cannot models. freely propagate. 2. Confinement. Hadrons are. 3. The string model. 4. Preconfinement. Need a model of partons' 5. The cluster model. confinement into 6. Underlying event hadrons: hadronization. models. Monte Carlo Methods 3 Bryan Webber Phenomenological Models Experimentally, two jets: Flat rapidity plateau and limited Monte Carlo Methods 3 Bryan Webber Estimate of Hadronization Effects Using this model, can estimate hadronization correction to perturbative quantities. Jet energy and momentum: with mean transverse momentum. Estimate from Fermi motion Jet acquires non-perturbative mass: Large: ~ 10 GeV for 100 GeV jets. Monte Carlo Methods 3 Bryan Webber Independent Fragmentation Model (“Feynman—Field”) Direct implementation of the above. Longitudinal momentum distribution = arbitrary fragmentation function: parameterization of data. Transverse momentum distribution = Gaussian. Recursively apply Hook up remaining soft and Strongly frame dependent. No obvious relation with perturbative emission. Not infrared safe. Not a model of confinement. Monte Carlo Methods 3 Bryan Webber Confinement Asymptotic freedom: becomes increasingly QED-like at short distances. QED: + – but at long distances, gluon self-interaction makes field lines attract each other: QCD: linear potential confinement Monte Carlo Methods 3 Bryan Webber Interquark potential Can measure from or from lattice QCD: quarkonia spectra: String tension Monte Carlo Methods 3 Bryan Webber String Model of Mesons Light quarks connected by string.
    [Show full text]
  • Deep Inelastic Scattering
    Particle Physics Michaelmas Term 2011 Prof Mark Thomson e– p Handout 6 : Deep Inelastic Scattering Prof. M.A. Thomson Michaelmas 2011 176 e– p Elastic Scattering at Very High q2 ,At high q2 the Rosenbluth expression for elastic scattering becomes •From e– p elastic scattering, the proton magnetic form factor is at high q2 Phys. Rev. Lett. 23 (1969) 935 •Due to the finite proton size, elastic scattering M.Breidenbach et al., at high q2 is unlikely and inelastic reactions where the proton breaks up dominate. e– e– q p X Prof. M.A. Thomson Michaelmas 2011 177 Kinematics of Inelastic Scattering e– •For inelastic scattering the mass of the final state hadronic system is no longer the proton mass, M e– •The final state hadronic system must q contain at least one baryon which implies the final state invariant mass MX > M p X For inelastic scattering introduce four new kinematic variables: ,Define: Bjorken x (Lorentz Invariant) where •Here Note: in many text books W is often used in place of MX Proton intact hence inelastic elastic Prof. M.A. Thomson Michaelmas 2011 178 ,Define: e– (Lorentz Invariant) e– •In the Lab. Frame: q p X So y is the fractional energy loss of the incoming particle •In the C.o.M. Frame (neglecting the electron and proton masses): for ,Finally Define: (Lorentz Invariant) •In the Lab. Frame: is the energy lost by the incoming particle Prof. M.A. Thomson Michaelmas 2011 179 Relationships between Kinematic Variables •Can rewrite the new kinematic variables in terms of the squared centre-of-mass energy, s, for the electron-proton collision e– p Neglect mass of electron •For a fixed centre-of-mass energy, it can then be shown that the four kinematic variables are not independent.
    [Show full text]
  • Particle Physics Dr Victoria Martin, Spring Semester 2012 Lecture 11: Mesons and Baryons
    Particle Physics Dr Victoria Martin, Spring Semester 2012 Lecture 11: Mesons and Baryons !Measuring Jets !Fragmentation !Mesons and Baryons !Isospin and hypercharge !SU(3) flavour symmetry !Heavy Quark states 1 From Tuesday: Summary • In QCD, the coupling strength "S decreases at high momentum transfer (q2) increases at low momentum transfer. • Perturbation theory is only useful at high momentum transfer. • Non-perturbative techniques required at low momentum transfer. • At colliders, hard scatter produces quark, anti-quarks and gluons. • Fragmentation (hadronisation) describes how partons produced in hard scatter become final state hadrons. Need non-perturbative techniques. • Final state hadrons observed in experiments as jets. Measure jet pT, !, ! • Key measurement at lepton collider, evidence for NC=3 colours of quarks. + 2 σ(e e− hadrons) e R = → = N q σ(e+e µ+µ ) c e2 − → − • Next lecture: mesons and baryons! Griffiths chapter 5. 2 6 41. Plots of cross sections and related quantities + σ and R in e e− Collisions -2 10 ω φ J/ψ -3 10 ψ(2S) ρ Υ -4 ρ ! 10 Z -5 10 [mb] σ -6 R 10 -7 10 -8 10 2 1 10 10 Υ 3 10 J/ψ ψ(2S) Z 10 2 φ ω to theR Fermilab accelerator complex. In addition, both the CDF [11] and DØ detectors [12] 10 were upgraded. The resultsρ reported! here utilize an order of magnitude higher integrated luminosity1 than reported previously [5]. ρ -1 10 2 II. PERTURBATIVE1 QCD 10 10 √s [GeV] + + + + Figure 41.6: World data on the total cross section of e e− hadrons and the ratio R(s)=σ(e e− hadrons, s)/σ(e e− µ µ−,s).
    [Show full text]
  • Fragmentation and Hadronization 1 Introduction
    Fragmentation and Hadronization Bryan R. Webber Theory Division, CERN, 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland, and Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0HE, U.K.1 1 Introduction Hadronic jets are amongst the most striking phenomena in high-energy physics, and their importance is sure to persist as searching for new physics at hadron colliders becomes the main activity in our field. Signatures involving jets almost always have the largest cross sections, but are the most difficult to interpret and to distinguish from background. Insight into the properties of jets is therefore doubly valuable: both as a test of our understanding of strong interaction dy- namics and as a tool for extracting new physics signals in multi-jet channels. In the present talk, I shall concentrate on jet fragmentation and hadroniza- tion, the topic of jet production having been covered admirably elsewhere [1, 2]. The terms fragmentation and hadronization are often used interchangeably, but I shall interpret the former strictly as referring to inclusive hadron spectra, for which factorization ‘theorems’2 are available. These allow predictions to be made without any detailed assumptions concerning hadron formation. A brief review of the relevant theory is given in Section 2. Hadronization, on the other hand, will be taken here to refer specifically to the mechanism by which quarks and gluons produced in hard processes form the hadrons that are observed in the final state. This is an intrinsically non- perturbative process, for which we only have models at present. The main models are reviewed in Section 3. In Section 4 their predictions, together with other less model-dependent expectations, are compared with the latest data on single- particle yields and spectra.
    [Show full text]
  • Hadronization from the QGP in the Light and Heavy Flavour Sectors Francesco Prino INFN – Sezione Di Torino Heavy-Ion Collision Evolution
    Hadronization from the QGP in the Light and Heavy Flavour sectors Francesco Prino INFN – Sezione di Torino Heavy-ion collision evolution Hadronization of the QGP medium at the pseudo- critical temperature Transition from a deconfined medium composed of quarks, antiquarks and gluons to color-neutral hadronic matter The partonic degrees of freedom of the deconfined phase convert into hadrons, in which partons are confined No first-principle description of hadron formation Non-perturbative problem, not calculable with QCD → Hadronisation from a QGP may be different from other cases in which no bulk of thermalized partons is formed 2 Hadron abundances Hadron yields (dominated by low-pT particles) well described by statistical hadronization model Abundances follow expectations for hadron gas in chemical and thermal equilibrium Yields depend on hadron masses (and spins), chemical potentials and temperature Questions not addressed by the statistical hadronization approach: How the equilibrium is reached? How the transition from partons to hadrons occurs at the microscopic level? 3 Hadron RAA and v2 vs. pT ALICE, PRC 995 (2017) 064606 ALICE, JEP09 (2018) 006 Low pT (<~2 GeV/c) : Thermal regime, hydrodynamic expansion driven by pressure gradients Mass ordering High pT (>8-10 GeV/c): Partons from hard scatterings → lose energy while traversing the QGP Hadronisation via fragmentation → same RAA and v2 for all species Intermediate pT: Kinetic regime, not described by hydro Baryon / meson grouping of v2 Different RAA for different hadron species
    [Show full text]
  • Discovery of Gluon
    Discovery of the Gluon Physics 290E Seminar, Spring 2020 Outline – Knowledge known at the time – Theory behind the discovery of the gluon – Key predicted interactions – Jet properties – Relevant experiments – Analysis techniques – Experimental results – Current research pertaining to gluons – Conclusion Knowledge known at the time The year is 1978, During this time, particle physics was arguable a mature subject. 5 of the 6 quarks were discovered by this point (the bottom quark being the most recent), and the only gauge boson that was known was the photon. There was also a theory of the strong interaction, quantum chromodynamics, that had been developed up to this point by Yang, Mills, Gell-Mann, Fritzsch, Leutwyler, and others. Trying to understand the structure of hadrons. Gluons can self-interact! Theory behind the discovery Analogous to QED, the strong interaction between quarks and gluons with a gauge group of SU(3) symmetry is known as quantum chromodynamics (QCD). Where the force mediating particle is the gluon. In QCD, we have some quite particular features such as asymptotic freedom and confinement. 4 α Short range:V (r) = − s QCD 3 r 4 α Long range: V (r) = − s + kr QCD 3 r (Between a quark and antiquark) Quantum fluctuations cause the bare color charge to be screened causes coupling strength to vary. Features are important for an understanding of jet formation. Theory behind the discovery John Ellis postulated the search for the gluon through bremsstrahlung radiation in electron- proton annihilation processes in 1976. Such a process will produce jets of hadrons: e−e+ qq¯g Furthermore, Mary Gaillard, Graham Ross, and John Ellis wrote a paper (“Search for Gluons in e+e- Annihilation.”) that described that the PETRA collider at DESY and the PEP collider at SLAC should be able to observe this process.
    [Show full text]
  • Quark and Lepton Compositeness, Searches
    92. Searches for quark and lepton compositeness 1 92. Searches for Quark and Lepton Compositeness Revised 2019 by K. Hikasa (Tohoku University), M. Tanabashi (Nagoya University), K. Terashi (ICEPP, University of Tokyo), and N. Varelas (University of Illinois at Chicago) 92.1. Limits on contact interactions If quarks and leptons are made of constituents, then at the scale of constituent binding energies (compositeness scale) there should appear new interactions among them. At energies much below the compositeness scale (Λ), these interactions are suppressed by inverse powers of Λ. The dominant effect of the compositeness of fermion ψ should come from the lowest dimensional interactions with four fermions (contact terms), whose most general flavor-diagonal color-singlet chirally invariant form reads [1,2] = + + + , L LLL LRR LLR LRL with 2 gcontact ij i i j µ j = η (ψ¯ γµψ )(ψ¯ γ ψ ), LLL 2Λ2 LL L L L L Xi,j 2 gcontact ij i i j µ j = η (ψ¯ γµψ )(ψ¯ γ ψ ), LRR 2Λ2 RR R R R R Xi,j 2 gcontact ij i i j µ j = η (ψ¯ γµψ )(ψ¯ γ ψ ), LLR 2Λ2 LR L L R R Xi,j 2 gcontact ij i i j µ j = η (ψ¯ γµψ )(ψ¯ γ ψ ), (92.1) LRL 2Λ2 RL R R L L Xi,j where i, j are the indices of fermion species. Color and other indices are suppressed in Eq. (92.1). Chiral invariance provides a natural explanation why quark and lepton ij ji masses are much smaller than their inverse size Λ.
    [Show full text]
  • Phenomenological Review on Quark–Gluon Plasma: Concepts Vs
    Review Phenomenological Review on Quark–Gluon Plasma: Concepts vs. Observations Roman Pasechnik 1,* and Michal Šumbera 2 1 Department of Astronomy and Theoretical Physics, Lund University, SE-223 62 Lund, Sweden 2 Nuclear Physics Institute ASCR 250 68 Rez/Prague,ˇ Czech Republic; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: In this review, we present an up-to-date phenomenological summary of research developments in the physics of the Quark–Gluon Plasma (QGP). A short historical perspective and theoretical motivation for this rapidly developing field of contemporary particle physics is provided. In addition, we introduce and discuss the role of the quantum chromodynamics (QCD) ground state, non-perturbative and lattice QCD results on the QGP properties, as well as the transport models used to make a connection between theory and experiment. The experimental part presents the selected results on bulk observables, hard and penetrating probes obtained in the ultra-relativistic heavy-ion experiments carried out at the Brookhaven National Laboratory Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (BNL RHIC) and CERN Super Proton Synchrotron (SPS) and Large Hadron Collider (LHC) accelerators. We also give a brief overview of new developments related to the ongoing searches of the QCD critical point and to the collectivity in small (p + p and p + A) systems. Keywords: extreme states of matter; heavy ion collisions; QCD critical point; quark–gluon plasma; saturation phenomena; QCD vacuum PACS: 25.75.-q, 12.38.Mh, 25.75.Nq, 21.65.Qr 1. Introduction Quark–gluon plasma (QGP) is a new state of nuclear matter existing at extremely high temperatures and densities when composite states called hadrons (protons, neutrons, pions, etc.) lose their identity and dissolve into a soup of their constituents—quarks and gluons.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2010.09206V5 [Hep-Ex] 22 Mar 2021 Large Backgrounds, Is Comparatively Under-Explored
    Permutationless Many-Jet Event Reconstruction with Symmetry Preserving Attention Networks Michael James Fenton ∗†,1 Alexander Shmakov ∗,2 Ta-Wei Ho,3 Shih-Chieh Hsu,4 Daniel Whiteson,1 and Pierre Baldi2 1Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California Irvine 2Department of Computer Science, University of California Irvine 3Department of Physics, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan 4Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Washington Top quarks, produced in large numbers at the Large Hadron Collider, have a complex detector signature and require special reconstruction techniques. The most common decay mode, the \all-jet" channel, results in a 6-jet final-state which is particularly difficult to reconstruct in pp collisions due to the large number of permutations possible. We present a novel approach to this class of problem, based on neural networks using a generalized attention mechanism, that we call Symmetry Preserving Attention Networks (Spa-Net). We train one such network to identify the decay products of each top quark unambiguously and without combinatorial explosion as an example of the power of this technique. This approach significantly outperforms existing state-of-the-art methods, correctly assigning all jets in 80.7% of 6-jet, 66.8% of 7-jet, and 52.3% of ≥ 8-jet events respectively. Our code is available at https://github.com/Alexanders101/SPA Net Code Release INTRODUCTION these events is correctly determining which jets originate from each of the parent top quarks. At the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), protons are col- lided at the highest energy ever produced in the labora- The top quark, as the most massive fundamental par- tory.
    [Show full text]