DOCSLIB.ORG

Search for Supersymmetry and Large Extra Dimensions with the Atlas Experiment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Search for Supersymmetry and Large Extra Dimensions with the Atlas Experiment !" #$!! # % &' $ () * + , $- , ! !. /0#(1$(( + () $- &2 & $- 2 3 $( , & 2 ! $ 4 3 5 $( , 5 , 2 $( #$ ()5 !$ ( 5 , !6 !. #.$$% 5 4 3 , 3 3 3 $75 3 $3 .!891 5 , 3 91$ - 5 *& , 4 5 "$":$8(1 , 5 ; 5 $ ! !! " !" <== $$ = > 0 << < < :8! -?%@"8@""@"!" -?%@"8@""@"!" @ " &!.@ SEARCH FOR SUPERSYMMETRY AND LARGE EXTRA DIMENSIONS WITH THE ATLAS EXPERIMENT Gabriele Bertoli Search for Supersymmetry and Large Extra Dimensions with the ATLAS Experiment Gabriele Bertoli ©Gabriele Bertoli, Stockholm University 2017 ISBN print 978-91-7797-071-2 ISBN PDF 978-91-7797-072-9 Printed in Sweden by Universitetsservice US-AB, Stockholm 2017 Distributor: Department of Physics, Stockholm University All'autore senza il quale questo lavoro non sarebbe stato possibile. Contents Sammanfattning xiii Abstract xiv 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Content Overview ......................... 2 1.2 Author’s Contribution ....................... 2 2 Theoretical Overview of the Standard Model 5 2.1 Introduction ............................. 5 2.2 Particle Classification ....................... 6 2.3 Electroweak Symmetry Group ................... 7 2.4 Electroweak Interactions ...................... 11 2.4.1 Charged Currents Interaction ............... 12 2.4.2 Neutral Current Interaction ................ 12 2.5 Strong Interaction ......................... 13 2.6 The Mass Generation Mechanism ................. 16 2.6.1 Global Symmetry Spontaneous Breaking ......... 16 2.6.2 The Higgs Mechanism ................... 17 2.6.3 Masses for the W ± and Z0 Gauge Bosons ........ 20 2.7 Experimental Confirmation of the Standard Model ....... 22 3 Beyond the Standard Model 25 3.1 Open Questions of the Standard Model ............. 25 3.1.1 The Hierarchy Problem and Naturalness ......... 25 3.1.2 Dark Matter ........................ 26 3.2 Supersymmetry ........................... 27 3.2.1 Status of the Experimental Search for Supersymmetry .28 3.3 Large Extra Dimensions ...................... 29 3.3.1 Consequences of the Kaluza-Klein Theory ........ 29 3.3.2 The Arkani-Hamed, Dimopoulos, Dvali Model ..... 30 3.3.3 Status of the Experimental Search for ADD ....... 31 4 Experimental Apparatus 33 4.1 The Large Hadron Collider .................... 33 4.2 The ATLAS Detector ....................... 34 4.2.1 The Coordinate System .................. 36 i 4.2.2 The Inner Detector ..................... 36 4.2.3 The Calorimeter ...................... 38 4.2.4 The Muon Spectrometer .................. 39 4.2.5 The Forward Detectors .................. 40 4.2.6 The Trigger System .................... 40 4.3 The 2015 and 2016 ATLAS Datasets ............... 40 5 Noise Studies with the Tile Calorimeter 43 5.1 Calorimetry ............................. 43 5.1.1 Electromagnetic Shower .................. 43 5.1.2 Hadronic Shower ...................... 43 5.1.3 Energy Resolution ..................... 44 5.2 The ATLAS TileCal ........................ 45 5.2.1 Signal Reconstruction ................... 46 Optimal Filtering ...................... 47 The TileCal Calibration .................. 47 5.2.2 Electronic Noise ...................... 48 Digital Noise ........................ 48 Cell Noise .......................... 49 5.3 The 2011 TileCal Run 1 Reprocessing .............. 50 5.3.1 Results ........................... 50 5.4 Time Stability ........................... 52 5.5 Conclusions ............................. 57 6 Objects Reconstruction for the Monojet Analysis 59 6.1 Primary Vertex ........................... 59 6.2 Track reconstruction ........................ 59 6.3 Electrons .............................. 60 6.4 Muons ................................ 62 6.5 Topocluster ............................. 62 6.6 Jets ................................. 63 6.6.1 The anti-k t Algorithm ................... 63 6.6.2 The Jet Vertex Tagger .................. 63 6.6.3 Jet Calibration ....................... 65 6.6.4 Jet Selection ........................ 66 6.6.5 Identification of b and c Jets ............... 67 6.7 Overlap Removal .......................... 67 6.8 Missing Transverse Energy ..................... 68 7 Search for Compressed Supersymmetry Models with 2015 AT- LAS Data 71 7.1 Missing Transverse Energy and SUSY Particle Masses ..... 71 7.2 Event Selection ........................... 74 7.3 Jet Veto .............................. 75 7.4 Sources of Background ....................... 77 7.5 Estimation of the Z + jets and W + jets backgrounds ..... 78 7.5.1 The Muon Control Region ................. 78 7.5.2 The Electron Control Region ............... 79 ii 7.5.3 The Di-Muon Control Region ............... 80 7.5.4 The Global Simultaneous Likelihood Fit ......... 81 7.6 Other Backgrounds ......................... 82 7.6.1 The Multi-Jet Background ................ 82 7.6.2 The Non-Collision Background .............. 83 7.7 Background Systematic Uncertainties ............... 83 7.7.1 Theoretical Uncertainties ................. 83 7.7.2 Experimental Uncertainties ................ 84 7.8 Signal Systematic Uncertainties .................. 85 7.8.1 Parton Distribution Function Uncertainties ....... 85 7.8.2 Scale Uncertainties ..................... 87 7.8.3 Matching, Tune, Initial and Final State Radiation Un- certainties .......................... 88 7.9 Results and Interpretations .................... 89 7.9.1 The Statistical Procedure ................. 89 The CLS Method ...................... 92 7.9.2 Expected Limits ...................... 93 7.9.3 Model Independent Limits ................. 95 7.9.4 SUSY Compressed Spectra Interpretation ........ 95 8 Search for Large Extra Dimensions with 2015 and 2016 ATLAS Data 97 8.1 Phenomenology of the ADD Model ................ 97 8.2 Validity of the Effective Field Theory ............... 100 8.3 Event Selection ........................... 102 8.4 Background Estimation ...................... 103 8.4.1 The Muon Control Region With b-Jets .......... 103 8.4.2 The Muon Control Region With b-Veto ......... 104 8.4.3 The Electron Control Region ............... 105 8.4.4 The Di-Muon Control Region ............... 106 8.4.5 Corrections to The V + jets Processes .......... 107 8.4.6 Fit Strategy ......................... 108 8.5 Systematic Uncertainties ...................... 109 8.5.1 Experimental Systematic Uncertainties .......... 110 Luminosity ......................... 110 Jets Nuisance Parameters ................. 110 b-tagging Nuisance Parameters .............. 110 Electron Nuisance Parameters ............... 111 Muon Nuisance Parameters ................ 111 Missing Transverse Energy Nuisance Parameters .... 112 Pileup Nuisance Parameters ................ 112 8.5.2 Background Theoretical Systematic Uncertainties .... 113 V + jets High Order Corrections ............. 113 V + jets Parton Distribution Function Uncertainties . 114 V + jets Matching Uncertainties ............. 115 Diboson Background .................... 115 Top Quark Background .................. 116 8.6 Signal Theoretical Systematic Uncertainties ........... 117 iii 8.6.1 Parton Distribution Function Uncertainties ....... 117 8.6.2 Scale Uncertainties ..................... 118 8.6.3 Tune, Initial and Final State Radiation Uncertainties . 119 8.7 Results and Interpretations .................... 119 8.7.1 Signal Region Yields After Background Fit ....... 120 8.7.2 Model Independent Limits ................. 122 8.7.3 ADD Model Interpretation ................ 123 9 Conclusions 127 Bibliography 128 iv Si sta, come d’autunno, sugli alberi, le foglie. [G. Ungaretti, Soldati] Acronyms E T transverse energy. 36 η pseudorapidity. 36 miss E T missing transverse momentum. 68 p T transverse momentum. 36 pp proton-proton. 33 ADC Analog to Digital Converter. 47 ADD Arkani-Hamed, Dimopoulos, Dvali. xiv, 1–3, 30, 31, 41, 73, 97–103, 109, 117–120, 123, 125, 128 ALFA Absolute Luminosity For ATLAS. 40 ATLAS A Toroidal LHC apparatuS. 1–3, 22, 28, 31, 34, 36, 67, 71, 72, 75, 86, 88, 95, 97, 98, 102, 110, 115, 119, 122, 127, 128 BG background. 81 BIB Beam Induced Background. 83 BSM Beyond Standard Model. 25, 73, 77, 82, 95, 99, 122, 127 CB Combined. 62 CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research. 1, 33 CIS Charge Injection System. 47 CL Confidence Level. 92, 120, 122, 127, 128 CMS Compact Muon Solenoid. 1, 28 COOL ATLAS Condition Database. 48 CR Control Region. 78, 81, 82, 106, 109 CSC Cathode Strip Chambers. 39 vii CST Calorimeter Soft Term. 68 CT Calorimeter Tagged. 62 EB Extended Barrel. 45 EFT Effective Field Theory. 30, 100, 102 EM electromagnetic. 38, 65, 66 EW Electroweak. 107, 108, 113, 114 FCal LAr Forward Calorimeter. 39 FEB Front-End Board. 61 FSR Final State Radiation. 116, 119 GCW Global Cell Weighting. 66 GR General Relativity. 29 GS Global Sequential. 66 HEC Hadronic End-cap Calorimeter. 39 HFN High Frequency Noise. 48 HG High Gain. 47 HGHG High Gain - High Gain. 49 HGLG Hig Gain - Low Gain. 49 HLT High Level Trigger. 40, 41 HS Hard Scatter. 59, 64, 75 HV High Voltage. 61 IBL Insertable B-Layer. 38 ID Inner Detector. 36, 61, 69 IOV Interval Of Validity. 52 IP interaction point. 34 ISR Initial State Radiation. 93, 116, 119 ITC Intermediate Tile Calorimeter. 46 JES Jet Energy Scale. 65, 66,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Symmetry and Gravity
    universe Article Making a Quantum Universe: Symmetry and Gravity Houri Ziaeepour 1,2 1 Institut UTINAM, CNRS UMR 6213, Observatoire de Besançon, Université de Franche Compté, 41 bis ave. de l’Observatoire, BP 1615, 25010 Besançon, France; [email protected] or [email protected] 2 Mullard Space Science Laboratory, University College London, Holmbury St. Mary, Dorking GU5 6NT, UK Received: 05 September 2020; Accepted: 17 October 2020; Published: 23 October 2020 Abstract: So far, none of attempts to quantize gravity has led to a satisfactory model that not only describe gravity in the realm of a quantum world, but also its relation to elementary particles and other fundamental forces. Here, we outline the preliminary results for a model of quantum universe, in which gravity is fundamentally and by construction quantic. The model is based on three well motivated assumptions with compelling observational and theoretical evidence: quantum mechanics is valid at all scales; quantum systems are described by their symmetries; universe has infinite independent degrees of freedom. The last assumption means that the Hilbert space of the Universe has SUpN Ñ 8q – area preserving Diff.pS2q symmetry, which is parameterized by two angular variables. We show that, in the absence of a background spacetime, this Universe is trivial and static. Nonetheless, quantum fluctuations break the symmetry and divide the Universe to subsystems. When a subsystem is singled out as reference—observer—and another as clock, two more continuous parameters arise, which can be interpreted as distance and time. We identify the classical spacetime with parameter space of the Hilbert space of the Universe.
    [Show full text]
  • The ATLAS Experiment
    The ATLAS Experiment Mapping the Secrets of the Universe Michael Barnett Physics Division July 2007 With help from: Joao Pequenao Paul Schaffner M. Barnett – July 2007 1 Large Hadron Collider CERN lab in Geneva Switzerland Protons will circulate in opposite directions and collide inside experimental areas 100 meters underground 17 miles around M. Barnett – July 2007 2 The ATLAS Experiment See animation M. Barnett – July 2007 3 Large Hadron Collider Numbers The fastest racetrack on the planet Trillions of protons will race around the 17-mile ring 11,000 times a second, traveling at 99.9999991% the speed of light. Seven times the energy of any previous accelerator. The emptiest space in the solar system Accelerating protons to almost the speed of light requires a vacuum as empty as interplanetary space. There is 10 times more atmosphere on the moon than there will be in the LHC. M. Barnett – July 2007 4 Large Hadron Collider Numbers The hottest spot in our galaxy Colliding protons will generate temperatures 100,000 times hotter than the sun (but in a minuscule space). Equivalent to a billionth of a second after the Big Bang M. Barnett – July 2007 5 LHC Exhibition at London Science Museum M. Barnett – July 2007 6 Large Hadron Collider Numbers The biggest most sophisticated detectors ever built Recording the debris from 600 million proton collisions per second requires building gargantuan devices that measure particles with 0.0004 inch precision. The most extensive computer system in the world Analyzing the data requires tens of thousands of computers around the world using the Grid.
    [Show full text]
  • Kaluza-Klein Gravity, Concentrating on the General Rel- Ativity, Rather Than Particle Physics Side of the Subject
    Kaluza-Klein Gravity J. M. Overduin Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria, P.O. Box 3055, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, V8W 3P6 and P. S. Wesson Department of Physics, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1 and Gravity Probe-B, Hansen Physics Laboratories, Stanford University, Stanford, California, U.S.A. 94305 Abstract We review higher-dimensional unified theories from the general relativity, rather than the particle physics side. Three distinct approaches to the subject are identi- fied and contrasted: compactified, projective and noncompactified. We discuss the cosmological and astrophysical implications of extra dimensions, and conclude that none of the three approaches can be ruled out on observational grounds at the present time. arXiv:gr-qc/9805018v1 7 May 1998 Preprint submitted to Elsevier Preprint 3 February 2008 1 Introduction Kaluza’s [1] achievement was to show that five-dimensional general relativity contains both Einstein’s four-dimensional theory of gravity and Maxwell’s the- ory of electromagnetism. He however imposed a somewhat artificial restriction (the cylinder condition) on the coordinates, essentially barring the fifth one a priori from making a direct appearance in the laws of physics. Klein’s [2] con- tribution was to make this restriction less artificial by suggesting a plausible physical basis for it in compactification of the fifth dimension. This idea was enthusiastically received by unified-field theorists, and when the time came to include the strong and weak forces by extending Kaluza’s mechanism to higher dimensions, it was assumed that these too would be compact. This line of thinking has led through eleven-dimensional supergravity theories in the 1980s to the current favorite contenders for a possible “theory of everything,” ten-dimensional superstrings.
    [Show full text]
  • Aaron Taylor Physics and Astronomy This
    Aaron Taylor Candidate Physics and Astronomy Department This dissertation is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication: Approved by the Dissertation Committee: Dr. Sally Seidel , Chairperson Dr. Pavel Reznicek Dr. Huaiyu Duan Dr. Douglas Fields Dr. Bruce Schumm CERN-THESIS-2017-006 04/11/2016 SEARCH FOR NEW PHYSICS PROCESSES WITH HEAVY QUARK SIGNATURES IN THE ATLAS EXPERIMENT by AARON TAYLOR B.A., Mathematics, University of California, Santa Cruz, 2011 M.S., Physics, University of New Mexico, 2014 DISSERTATION Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Physics The University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico May, 2017 ©2017, Aaron Taylor iii Acknowledgements I would like to thank Professor Sally Seidel, for her constant support and guidance in my research. I would also like to thank her for her patience in helping me to develop my technical writing and presentation skills; without her assistance, I would never have gained the skill I have in that field. I would like to thank Konstantin Toms, for his constant assistance with the ATLAS code, and for generally giving advice on how to handle data analysis. The Bs → 4μ analysis likely wouldn’t have gotten anywhere without him. I would like to deeply thank Pavel Reznicek, without whom I would never have gotten as great an understanding of ATLAS code as I currently have. It is no exaggeration to say that I would not have been half as successful as I have been without his constant patience and understanding. Thank you. Many thanks to Martin Hoeferkamp, who taught me much about instrumentation and physical measurements.
    [Show full text]
  • NRP-3 the Effect of Beryllium Interaction with Fast Neutrons on the Reactivity of Etrr-2 Research Reactor
    Seventh Conference of Nuclear Sciences & Applications 6-10 February 2000, Cairo, Egypt NRP-3 The Effect Of Beryllium Interaction With Fast Neutrons On the Reactivity Of Etrr-2 Research Reactor Moustafa Aziz and A.M. EL Messiry National Center for Nuclear Safety Atomic Energy Autho , Cairo , Egypt ABSTRACT The effect of beryllium interactions with fast neutrons is studied for Etrr_2 research reactors. Isotope build up inside beryllium blocks is calculated under different irradiation times. A new model for the Etrr_2 research reactor is designed using MCNP code to calculate the reactivity and flux change of the reactor due to beryllium poison. Key words: Research Reactors , Neutron Flux , Beryllium Blocks, Fast Neutrons and Reactivity INTRODUCTION Beryllium irradiated by fast neutrons with energies in the range 0.7-20 Mev undergoes (n,a) and (n,2n) reactions resulting in subsequent formation of the isotopes lithium (Li-6), tritium (H-3) and helium (He-3 and He-4 ). Beryllium interacts with fast neutrons to produce 6He that decay 6 6 ( T!/2 =0.8 s) to produce Li . Li interacts with neutron to produce tritium which suffer /? (T1/2 = 12.35 year) decay and converts to 3He which finally interact with neutron to produce tritium. These processes some times defined as Beryllium poison. Negative effect of this process are met whenever beryllium is used in a thermal reactor as a reflector or moderator . Because of their large thermal neutron absorption cross sections , the buildup of He-3 and Li-6 concentrations ,initiated by the Be(n,a) reaction , results in large negative reactivities which alter the reactivity , flux and power distributions.
    [Show full text]
  • Slides Lecture 1
    Advanced Topics in Particle Physics Probing the High Energy Frontier at the LHC Ulrich Husemann, Klaus Reygers, Ulrich Uwer University of Heidelberg Winter Semester 2009/2010 CERN = European Laboratory for Partice Physics the world’s largest particle physics laboratory, founded 1954 Historic name: “Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire” Lake Geneva Proton-proton2500 employees, collider almost 10000 guest scientists from 85 nations Jura Mountains 8.5 km Accelerator complex Prévessin site (approx. 100 m underground) (France) Meyrin site (Switzerland) Probing the High Energy Frontier at the LHC, U Heidelberg, Winter Semester 09/10, Lecture 1 2 Large Hadron Collider: CMS Experiment: Proton-Proton and Multi Purpose Detector Lead-Lead Collisions LHCb Experiment: B Physics and CP Violation ALICE-Experiment: ATLAS Experiment: Heavy Ion Physics Multi Purpose Detector Probing the High Energy Frontier at the LHC, U Heidelberg, Winter Semester 09/10, Lecture 1 3 The Lecture “Probing the High Energy Frontier at the LHC” Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN: premier address in experimental particle physics for the next 10+ years LHC restart this fall: first beam scheduled for mid-November LHC and Heidelberg Experimental groups from Heidelberg participate in three out of four large LHC experiments (ALICE, ATLAS, LHCb) Theory groups working on LHC physics → Cornerstone of physics research in Heidelberg → Lots of exciting opportunities for young people Probing the High Energy Frontier at the LHC, U Heidelberg, Winter Semester 09/10, Lecture 1 4 Scope
    [Show full text]
  • Loop Quantum Cosmology, Modified Gravity and Extra Dimensions
    universe Review Loop Quantum Cosmology, Modified Gravity and Extra Dimensions Xiangdong Zhang Department of Physics, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510641, China; [email protected] Academic Editor: Jaume Haro Received: 24 May 2016; Accepted: 2 August 2016; Published: 10 August 2016 Abstract: Loop quantum cosmology (LQC) is a framework of quantum cosmology based on the quantization of symmetry reduced models following the quantization techniques of loop quantum gravity (LQG). This paper is devoted to reviewing LQC as well as its various extensions including modified gravity and higher dimensions. For simplicity considerations, we mainly focus on the effective theory, which captures main quantum corrections at the cosmological level. We set up the basic structure of Brans–Dicke (BD) and higher dimensional LQC. The effective dynamical equations of these theories are also obtained, which lay a foundation for the future phenomenological investigations to probe possible quantum gravity effects in cosmology. Some outlooks and future extensions are also discussed. Keywords: loop quantum cosmology; singularity resolution; effective equation 1. Introduction Loop quantum gravity (LQG) is a quantum gravity scheme that tries to quantize general relativity (GR) with the nonperturbative techniques consistently [1–4]. Many issues of LQG have been carried out in the past thirty years. In particular, among these issues, loop quantum cosmology (LQC), which is the cosmological sector of LQG has received increasing interest and has become one of the most thriving and fruitful directions of LQG [5–9]. It is well known that GR suffers singularity problems and this, in turn, implies that our universe also has an infinitely dense singularity point that is highly unphysical.
    [Show full text]
  • Aspects of Loop Quantum Gravity
    Aspects of loop quantum gravity Alexander Nagen 23 September 2020 Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science of Imperial College London 1 Contents 1 Introduction 4 2 Classical theory 12 2.1 The ADM / initial-value formulation of GR . 12 2.2 Hamiltonian GR . 14 2.3 Ashtekar variables . 18 2.4 Reality conditions . 22 3 Quantisation 23 3.1 Holonomies . 23 3.2 The connection representation . 25 3.3 The loop representation . 25 3.4 Constraints and Hilbert spaces in canonical quantisation . 27 3.4.1 The kinematical Hilbert space . 27 3.4.2 Imposing the Gauss constraint . 29 3.4.3 Imposing the diffeomorphism constraint . 29 3.4.4 Imposing the Hamiltonian constraint . 31 3.4.5 The master constraint . 32 4 Aspects of canonical loop quantum gravity 35 4.1 Properties of spin networks . 35 4.2 The area operator . 36 4.3 The volume operator . 43 2 4.4 Geometry in loop quantum gravity . 46 5 Spin foams 48 5.1 The nature and origin of spin foams . 48 5.2 Spin foam models . 49 5.3 The BF model . 50 5.4 The Barrett-Crane model . 53 5.5 The EPRL model . 57 5.6 The spin foam - GFT correspondence . 59 6 Applications to black holes 61 6.1 Black hole entropy . 61 6.2 Hawking radiation . 65 7 Current topics 69 7.1 Fractal horizons . 69 7.2 Quantum-corrected black hole . 70 7.3 A model for Hawking radiation . 73 7.4 Effective spin-foam models .
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2001.07837V2 [Hep-Ex] 4 Jul 2020 Scale Funding Will Be Requested at Different Stages Across the Globe
    Brazilian Participation in the Next-Generation Collider Experiments W. L. Aldá Júniora C. A. Bernardesb D. De Jesus Damiãoa M. Donadellic D. E. Martinsd G. Gil da Silveirae;a C. Henself H. Malbouissona A. Massafferrif E. M. da Costaa C. Mora Herreraa I. Nastevad M. Rangeld P. Rebello Telesa T. R. F. P. Tomeib A. Vilela Pereiraa aDepartamento de Física Nuclear e Altas Energias, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Rua São Francisco Xavier, 524, CEP 20550-900, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil bUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp), Núcleo de Computação Científica Rua Dr. Bento Teobaldo Ferraz, 271, 01140-070, Sao Paulo, Brazil cInstituto de Física, Universidade de São Paulo (USP), Rua do Matão, 1371, CEP 05508-090, São Paulo, Brazil dUniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Instituto de Física, Caixa Postal 68528, 21941-972 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil eInstituto de Física, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul , Av. Bento Gonçalves, 9550, CEP 91501-970, Caixa Postal 15051, Porto Alegre, Brazil f Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas (CBPF), Rua Dr. Xavier Sigaud, 150, CEP 22290-180 Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract: This proposal concerns the participation of the Brazilian High-Energy Physics community in the next-generation collider experiments.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2003.07868V3 [Hep-Ph] 21 Jul 2020 Ejmnc Allanach, C
    CERN-LPCC-2020-001, FERMILAB-FN-1098-CMS-T, Imperial/HEP/2020/RIF/01 Reinterpretation of LHC Results for New Physics: Status and Recommendations after Run 2 We report on the status of efforts to improve the reinterpretation of searches and mea- surements at the LHC in terms of models for new physics, in the context of the LHC Reinterpretation Forum. We detail current experimental offerings in direct searches for new particles, measurements, technical implementations and Open Data, and provide a set of recommendations for further improving the presentation of LHC results in order to better enable reinterpretation in the future. We also provide a brief description of existing software reinterpretation frameworks and recent global analyses of new physics that make use of the current data. Waleed Abdallah,1, 2 Shehu AbdusSalam,3 Azar Ahmadov,4 Amine Ahriche,5, 6 Gaël Alguero,7 Benjamin C. Allanach,8, ∗ Jack Y. Araz,9 Alexandre Arbey,10, 11 Chiara Arina,12 Peter Athron,13 Emanuele Bagnaschi,14 Yang Bai,15 Michael J. Baker,16 Csaba Balazs,13 Daniele Barducci,17, 18 Philip Bechtle,19, ∗ Aoife Bharucha,20 Andy Buckley,21, † Jonathan Butterworth,22, ∗ Haiying Cai,23 Claudio Campagnari,24 Cari Cesarotti,25 Marcin Chrzaszcz,26 Andrea Coccaro,27 Eric Conte,28, 29 Jonathan M. Cornell,30 Louie D. Corpe,22 Matthias Danninger,31 Luc Darmé,32 Aldo Deandrea,10 Nishita Desai,33, ∗ Barry Dillon,34 Caterina Doglioni,35 Matthew J. Dolan,16 Juhi Dutta,1, 36 John R. Ellis,37 Sebastian Ellis,38 Farida Fassi,39 Matthew Feickert,40 Nicolas Fernandez,40 Sylvain Fichet,41 Thomas Flacke,42 Benjamin Fuks,43, 44, ∗ Achim Geiser,45 Marie-Hélène Genest,7 Akshay Ghalsasi,46 Tomas Gonzalo,13 Mark Goodsell,43 Stefania Gori,46 Philippe Gras,47 Admir Greljo,11 Diego Guadagnoli,48 Sven Heinemeyer,49, 50, 51 Lukas A.
    [Show full text]
  • TASI Lectures on Extra Dimensions and Branes
    hep-ph/0404096 TASI Lectures on Extra Dimensions and Branes∗ Csaba Cs´aki Institute of High Energy Phenomenology, Newman Laboratory of Elementary Particle Physics, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 [email protected] Abstract This is a pedagogical introduction into theories with branes and extra dimensions. We first discuss the construction of such models from an effective field theory point of view, and then discuss large extra dimensions and some of their phenomenological consequences. Various possible phenomena (split fermions, mediation of supersym- metry breaking and orbifold breaking of symmetries) are discussed next. The second arXiv:hep-ph/0404096v1 9 Apr 2004 half of this review is entirely devoted to warped extra dimensions, including the con- struction of the Randall-Sundrum solution, intersecting branes, radius stabilization, KK phenomenology and bulk gauge bosons. ∗Lectures at the Theoretical Advanced Study Institute 2002, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO June 3-28, 2002. Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 Large Extra Dimensions 2 2.1 Matching the higher dimensional theory to the 4D effectivetheory..... 3 2.2 What is a brane and how to write an effective theory for it? . ....... 7 2.3 Coupling of SM fields to the various graviton components . ......... 11 2.4 Phenomenology with large extra dimensions . ...... 16 3 Various Models with Flat Extra Dimensions 21 3.1 Split fermions, proton decay and flavor hierarchy . ......... 21 3.2 Mediation of supersymmetry breaking via extra dimensions (gaugino mediation) 26 3.3 Symmetry breaking via orbifolds . .... 33 3.3.1 Breaking of the grand unified gauge group via orbifolds in SUSY GUT’s 35 3.3.2 Supersymmetry breaking via orbifolds .
    [Show full text]
  • Detection of Cosmic Rays at the LHC Detection of Cosmic Rays at the LHC
    Particle and Astroparticle Physics at the Large Hadron Collider --Hadronic Interactions-- Albert De Roeck CERN, Geneva, Switzerland Antwerp University Belgium UC-Davis California USA NTU, Singapore November 15th 2019 Outline • Introduction on the LHC and LHC physics program • LHC results for Astroparticle physics • Measurements of event characteristics at 13 TeV • Forward measurements • Cosmic ray measurements • LHC and light ions? • Summary The LHC Machine and Experiments MoEDAL LHCf FASER totem CM energy → Run-1: (2010-2012) 7/8 TeV Run-2: (2015-2018) 13 TeV -> Now 8 experiments Run-2 starts proton-proton Run-2 finished 24/10/18 6:00am 2018 2010-2012: Run-1 at 7/8 TeV CM energy Collected ~ 27 fb-1 2015-2018: Run-2 at 13 TeV CM Energy Collected ~ 140 fb-1 2021-2023/24 : Run-3 Expect ⇨ 14 TeV CM Energy and ~ 200/300 fb-1 The LHC is also a Heavy Ion Collider ALICE Data taking during the HI run • All experiments take AA or pA data (except TOTEM) Expected for Run-3: in addition short pO and OO runs ⇨ pO certainly of interest for Cosmic Ray Physics Community! 4 10 years of LHC Operation • LHC: 7 TeV in March 2010 ->The highest energy in the lab! • LHC @ 13 TeV from 2015 onwards March 30 2010 …waiting.. • Most important highlight so far: …since 4:00 am The discovery of a Higgs boson • Many results on Standard Model process measurements, QCD and particle production, top-physics, b-physics, heavy ion physics, searches, Higgs physics • Waiting for the next discovery… -> Searches beyond the Standard Model 12:58 7 TeV collisions!!! New Physics Hunters
    [Show full text]