Experimental SummaryExperimental Summary

Doug GlenzinskiFermilab

Aspen Winter Physics Series“New Physics at the Electroweak ScaleAnd New Signals at Hadron Colliders”

January 2007

Doug GlenzinskiFermilab

Aspen Winter Physics Series“New Physics at the Electroweak ScaleAnd New Signals at Hadron Colliders”

January 2007

– Henry, “One of my favorite summaries was by Cronin”– Henry, “One of my favorite summaries was by Cronin”

Thank you!Thank you!

• Conference Organizers: Henry, Florencia, David, Petar, Neil

– Great conference program– Intimate setting– Beautiful location

• Conference Organizers: Henry, Florencia, David, Petar, Neil

– Great conference program– Intimate setting– Beautiful location

• I thought you were my friends• I thought you were my friends

This talk will be (mostly) backwards.

This talk will be (mostly) backwards.

The FutureThe Future

The Future: ILC

It will be great… if it happens

The Future: ILC

It will be great… if it happens

• Could offer the definitive determination of the EWK sector

• Beautiful physics

(talk by J. Brau)

The Future: LHC

It will be great… when it happens

The Future: LHC

It will be great… when it happens

• Should offer first look of EWKSB and BSM Physics

• Exciting physics

(talks by D.Rousseau, T.LeCompte, B.Zhou, J.Conway, S.Dasu, J.Rohlf, C.Hof, T.Skwarnicki)

QuickTime™ et undécompresseur TIFF (non compressé)

sont requis pour visionner cette image.

CMS

ATLAS

December 2006

LHCb

The Future:

Dark Matter and -Physics

The Future:

Dark Matter and -Physics

• Have offered first evidence of BSM

• Much progress in past decade

The Future: Dark Matter and -PhysicsThe Future: Dark Matter and -Physics

• -mixing well established and its phenomenology largely specified– Inverted mass heirarchy?– Absolute mass scale?– Dirac or Majorana?

• It will take some time to reach the experimental sensitivities needed to definitively answer these questions

• To what degree do these answers inform the model building we expect to do once EWSB is revealed?

• Next generation direct Dark Matter searches will have sensitivity for large part of relevant SuSy space

• -mixing well established and its phenomenology largely specified– Inverted mass heirarchy?– Absolute mass scale?– Dirac or Majorana?

• It will take some time to reach the experimental sensitivities needed to definitively answer these questions

• To what degree do these answers inform the model building we expect to do once EWSB is revealed?

• Next generation direct Dark Matter searches will have sensitivity for large part of relevant SuSy space

The Future: Dark Matter and -PhysicsThe Future: Dark Matter and -Physics

• T2K (2009), NoA (2011) sin223 ~ 0.01

– Possibly sensitive to sin213 > 0.01

– Determine whether or not heirarchy is inverted

• Double Chooz (2008) Daya Bay (2011)– Unambiguous sensitivity to sin213>0.01

• Majorana or Dirac?– to reach required sensitivities (assuming inverted

heirarchy) will take quite some while (>2015)– Even longer if normal heirarchy

• T2K (2009), NoA (2011) sin223 ~ 0.01

– Possibly sensitive to sin213 > 0.01

– Determine whether or not heirarchy is inverted

• Double Chooz (2008) Daya Bay (2011)– Unambiguous sensitivity to sin213>0.01

• Majorana or Dirac?– to reach required sensitivities (assuming inverted

heirarchy) will take quite some while (>2015)– Even longer if normal heirarchy

(talk by M.Wascko)

The (near) Future: MiniBooneThe (near) Future: MiniBoone

• LSND Result impossible to accommodate without invoking additional -families

• MiniBoone designed to experimentally verify or exclude this result– Blind analysis– In final stages of review

• A positive result would have an immediate effect on model building

• LSND Result impossible to accommodate without invoking additional -families

• MiniBoone designed to experimentally verify or exclude this result– Blind analysis– In final stages of review

• A positive result would have an immediate effect on model building

(talk by J.Monroe)

The Future: Dark Matter SearchesThe Future: Dark Matter Searches

• DAMA could soon be ruled-out

• Many novel techniques being pursued to get to ~1ton detectors

• XENON, XMASS, WARP, COUPP

• Few years before these come online at full sensitivities

• DAMA could soon be ruled-out

• Many novel techniques being pursued to get to ~1ton detectors

• XENON, XMASS, WARP, COUPP

• Few years before these come online at full sensitivities

(talk by J.Collar)

The Present

It’s the best it’s ever been

The Present

It’s the best it’s ever been

• Achieving unprecedented sensitivities across hep

• Expect significantly improved sensitivities prior to first LHC physics results (<2010)

• Best place to look for new physics - there’s data

The PresentThe Present

• Summarize progress in three main areas

– Flavor Physics Constraints

– Precision Electroweak Constraints

– Higgs and BSM Searches

• Concentrate on progress since last Aspen conf

• When appropriate, comment on expected improvements over next two years

• Summarize progress in three main areas

– Flavor Physics Constraints

– Precision Electroweak Constraints

– Higgs and BSM Searches

• Concentrate on progress since last Aspen conf

• When appropriate, comment on expected improvements over next two years

Flavor Physics Constraints:Flavor Physics Constraints:

• Impressive progress on all aspects of CKM matrix

– Vtd : ms

– Vub

: tree vs penguin : from , , and decays : 3-body charmless B-decays

• Progress using Rare Decays• Restrictions on NP contributions to phase and

mixing amplitude of Bs system

• Impressive progress on all aspects of CKM matrix

– Vtd : ms

– Vub

: tree vs penguin : from , , and decays : 3-body charmless B-decays

• Progress using Rare Decays• Restrictions on NP contributions to phase and

mixing amplitude of Bs system

Flavor Physics Constraints: msFlavor Physics Constraints: ms

• Constrains Vtd/Vts

• Jan-06 had limits

ms>16.6 ps-1 and

sensitivities of 13 ps-1

• Jun-06 had 3Sep-06 had 5

• Limited by Lattice calculations

• Constrains Vtd/Vts

• Jan-06 had limits

ms>16.6 ps-1 and

sensitivities of 13 ps-1

• Jun-06 had 3Sep-06 had 5

• Limited by Lattice calculations€

ms =17.77 ± 0.10 ± 0.07 ps-1

Vtd

Vts

= 0.2060 ± 0.0007−0.0060+0.0081

(talk by P.Gutierrez)

Flavor Physics Constraints: VubFlavor Physics Constraints: Vub

• Measured with inclusive and exclusive modes

• Many 2006 updates to exclusive BR

• Vub limited by LQCD uncertainties

• Some tension with sin2 determinations

• sin2 statistics limited (even b ccs)

• Measured with inclusive and exclusive modes

• Many 2006 updates to exclusive BR

• Vub limited by LQCD uncertainties

• Some tension with sin2 determinations

• sin2 statistics limited (even b ccs)

Direct: sin2 = 0.67±0.03

Indirect: sin2 = 0.76±0.04

Difference: = 0.09±0.05

(talk by P.Dauncey)

Flavor Physics Constraints: Trees vs PenguinsFlavor Physics Constraints: Trees vs Penguins

• Comparison can give evidence of NP– b ccs (tree)– b sss (penguin)

• Need theoretical input to correct for penguin pollution– corrections tend to

increase sin2

• Statistics can help– Expect x2 data over

next two years

• Comparison can give evidence of NP– b ccs (tree)– b sss (penguin)

• Need theoretical input to correct for penguin pollution– corrections tend to

increase sin2

• Statistics can help– Expect x2 data over

next two years

(sin2)0.0 0.1-0.1

(talk by P.Dauncey)

Flavor Physics Constraints: Rare DecaysFlavor Physics Constraints: Rare Decays

• SM rare decays proceed through loop diagrams - where NP can contribute

• First evidence of B->reported this year

• All three important to constrain MSSM

• Improvements expected on all 3 from BaBar/Belle (b->s, B->l) and CDF/D0 (B->)

• SM rare decays proceed through loop diagrams - where NP can contribute

• First evidence of B->reported this year

• All three important to constrain MSSM

• Improvements expected on all 3 from BaBar/Belle (b->s, B->l) and CDF/D0 (B->)

Belle (414 fb-1)B->

€

B(B+ → τ +ν ) = (1.79 −0.49+0.56 -0.51

+0.46) ×10−4 Belle (3.5σ )

B(B+ → τ +ν ) = (0.88 ± 0.70 ± 0.11) ×10−4 BaBar (1.8σ )

B(B+ → τ +ν ) = (1.31± 0.48) ×10−4 BaBelle (2.5σ )

€

b → sγ, B+ → l +ν , Bs → μ +μ−

(talk by S.Robertson)

Electroweak Constraints: W-Boson MassElectroweak Constraints: W-Boson Mass

• ADLO finalized their Mw– Awaiting final CR uncertainties

• CDF presents first RunII determination (200 pb-1)– Single-most precise– New Tev average

• ProgressJan-06: Mw = +/- 34 MeV

Today: Mw = +/- 25 MeV

• Prospects– CDF Mw<25 MeV with data

on tape– D0 sensitivity similar

• ADLO finalized their Mw– Awaiting final CR uncertainties

• CDF presents first RunII determination (200 pb-1)– Single-most precise– New Tev average

• ProgressJan-06: Mw = +/- 34 MeV

Today: Mw = +/- 25 MeV

• Prospects– CDF Mw<25 MeV with data

on tape– D0 sensitivity similar

LEP: 80376 +/- 33 TeV: 80429 +/- 39 MeVWorld: 80398 +/- 25

(talk by A.Kotwal)

Electroweak Constraints: Top-Quark MassElectroweak Constraints: Top-Quark Mass

• Steady improvement – Inclusion of more data– Improvement to analysis

techniques– Have surpassed Run II goal

• Limiting systematic (JES) largely eliminated– Via in situ W->jj decays

• ProgressJan-05: Mt = +/- 4.3 GeV

Jan-06: Mt = +/- 2.9 GeV

Today: Mt = +/- 2.1 GeV

• ProspectsRun II: Mt = +/- 1.0-1.5 GeV

• Steady improvement – Inclusion of more data– Improvement to analysis

techniques– Have surpassed Run II goal

• Limiting systematic (JES) largely eliminated– Via in situ W->jj decays

• ProgressJan-05: Mt = +/- 4.3 GeV

Jan-06: Mt = +/- 2.9 GeV

Today: Mt = +/- 2.1 GeV

• ProspectsRun II: Mt = +/- 1.0-1.5 GeV

TeV: 171.4 +/- 2.1 GeV

(talk by R.Wallny)

Electroweak ConstraintsElectroweak Constraints

• Mh = 80 + 36 - 26 GeV

• Mh < 153 GeV @ 95% CL Including CDF’s new Mw:

(M.Grunweld, private communication)

Higgs Sensitivity: DiBosonsHiggs Sensitivity: DiBosons

• Share multi-lepton signature + s

• Want maximal lepton acceptance• WW, WZ, ZZ important Tevatron benchmarks

demonstrating higgs sensitivity• These will be backgrounds for higgs search

• Share multi-lepton signature + s

• Want maximal lepton acceptance• WW, WZ, ZZ important Tevatron benchmarks

demonstrating higgs sensitivity• These will be backgrounds for higgs search

q

q

W*W

Z

Diboson production

hW

W

g

g

Important for mh>150 GeV

Higgs Sensitivity: DiBosonsHiggs Sensitivity: DiBosons

In 1 fb-1 have measured xsecdown to a picobarn level.

In 1 fb-1 have measured xsecdown to a picobarn level. €

Nobs =16 Nbgd = 2.7 ± 0.4

(6σ observation)

σ (pp →WZ) = 5.0−1.6+1.8 pb

(talk by M.Chertok)

Higgs Sensitivity: Single-TopHiggs Sensitivity: Single-Top

• Share same Wbb signature• Both small signals on large background• Single top important Tevatron benchmarks

demonstrating higgs sensitivity• Eventually a background for higgs search

• Share same Wbb signature• Both small signals on large background• Single top important Tevatron benchmarks

demonstrating higgs sensitivity• Eventually a background for higgs search

s-channel single top

q

q

W*t

b

W

b

Important for mh<130 GeV

q

q

W*W

hb

b

Higgs Sensitivity: Single-TopHiggs Sensitivity: Single-Top

(talk by Y.Coadou)

€

obs = 4.9 ±1.4 pb

σ SM = 2.9 ± 0.3 pb

p - value = 0.035% (3.4σ )

SM Compatibility =11%CDF better sensitivity, but worse result:

(cdf best)=2.7+/-1.4 pb (2.3)

Higgs SensitivityHiggs Sensitivity

• differences in CDF/D0 sensitivity dominated by differences in luminosity used for each contributing analysis (15 total)

• challenging but doable - CDF/D0 enthusiastically pursuing (talk by D.Cho)

Higgs SensitivityHiggs Sensitivity

Tevatron will have sensitivity to MSSM higgs for all tan>30 and MA<200 GeV/c2

Search for New PhenomenaSearch for New PhenomenaCDF 1 fb-1

• No significant deviations from SM … but not for lack of trying

• Thorough program looking for BSM

• Over next two years expect another factor ~4 in data (x7 for full Run2)

Search for New Phenomena: LimitsSearch for New Phenomena: Limits

(cf. talks by M.Titov, J.Conway, D.Cho, M.Kruse, R.Erbacher, P.Gutierez, R.Culbertson, P.Verdier, M.Chertok)

Search for New PhenomenaSearch for New Phenomena

• Smattering of

~2.0-2.5 excesses

• My favorite:– h--> search– well described by

mh=160

• D0 result soon

• More data on tape and coming

• Smattering of

~2.0-2.5 excesses

• My favorite:– h--> search– well described by

mh=160

• D0 result soon

• More data on tape and coming

CDF 1 fb-1

h->~2 excess

(talk by J.Conway)

1979

1980

1981

1984

1983

1982

1985

1989

1970 1978

c bu,d,s,e,e

1990 1992 1994

199519931991

t

I show up.

(circ

a 19

74)

ConclusionsConclusions

• We know the Standard Model is incomplete.

• But it does an impressive job of describing the data, some pieces to great precision.

• Still, we can’t wait to replace it.

• I think (hope) the next few years will bring chaos– First crack from B-Factories or Tevatron?– LHC much anticipated, first physics in 2-3 years– MiniBoone, Dark Matter Searches, and Auger could

reveal surprises of their own

• It will be fantastic fun

• We know the Standard Model is incomplete.

• But it does an impressive job of describing the data, some pieces to great precision.

• Still, we can’t wait to replace it.

• I think (hope) the next few years will bring chaos– First crack from B-Factories or Tevatron?– LHC much anticipated, first physics in 2-3 years– MiniBoone, Dark Matter Searches, and Auger could

reveal surprises of their own

• It will be fantastic fun

AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements

• I’m extremely grateful for help received from:R.Kowalewski, B.Keyser, R.Demika, J.Berryhill, Y.-K.Kim,

S.Robertson, M.Wasko, M.Ave, P.Dauncey, Y.Caodou

• Apologies for omissions, mis-representations, etc.

• I’m extremely grateful for help received from:R.Kowalewski, B.Keyser, R.Demika, J.Berryhill, Y.-K.Kim,

S.Robertson, M.Wasko, M.Ave, P.Dauncey, Y.Caodou

• Apologies for omissions, mis-representations, etc.

Post-Script: Improved ToolsPost-Script: Improved Tools

• There were many exciting new results presented at this conference and we anticipate many more in the next few years.

• None would have been possible without having a thorough understanding of “the basics”– PDF have improved dramatically over last several years

thanks to HERA (W.Smith’s talk)

• Improved MC descriptions of important processes and backgrounds central to achieving our physics aims (talks by Z.Sullivan, F.Petriello, P.Skands)

• There were many exciting new results presented at this conference and we anticipate many more in the next few years.

• None would have been possible without having a thorough understanding of “the basics”– PDF have improved dramatically over last several years

thanks to HERA (W.Smith’s talk)

• Improved MC descriptions of important processes and backgrounds central to achieving our physics aims (talks by Z.Sullivan, F.Petriello, P.Skands)