The D0 Experiment - nevis.columbia.eduevans/talks/osu02.pdf · H.Evans OSU Seminar - 10-Apr-02 1...

H.Evans OSU Seminar - 10-Apr-02 1

Plotting the Downfallof the Standard Model

at DØ

Plotting the Downfallof the Standard Model

at DØHal Evans Columbia University

1. Sweeping Generalizations (broad goals of HEP)

2. Fermilab & the Tevatron (physics in the prairie)

3. The DØ Experiment (status & schemes)Run II has started! (we haven’t found the Higgs…) yet


What do We Know?What do We Know?

Point-Like Particles: Fermions Fundamental Forces: Bosons

mf2>113H0E-W Sym

10-1 (MZ)0gStrong91.1882Z0

10-580.427W±Weak10-20γE-M10-390GGravity

StrengthMass[GeV]

BosonForce

4.41503–9-1/3bsd

17430013001–5 +2/3tcu

Quarks

Leptons

17771050.5-1τµe

υµ O(<eV)0υτυe

Mass[MeV]

Chg[e]

Particle


What’s it all about?What’s it all about?The broad goal of HEP

measure something at odds w/ an SM prediction

⇒ hints of what lies beyond

If it ain’t broke – fix it!1. Has 19 arbitrary parameters2. Higgs Mass not stable to

radiative corrections∗

∗ Λ ~ Mplanck for no new physics∗ Mh < 800 GeV ⇒ tuning to 10-16

3. Why’s? of EW Symmetry Breaking

4. What about Gravity?∗ Why Mpl(1018GeV)»MEW(250GeV)?

222

20

2

4~ hhh MMM δ

πλ

+Λ+


Where do we look?Where do we look?Concentrate on areas where

we don’t have complete understanding measurements are few

1. Why is there Mass? EW Symmetry Breakinga. direct searches for Higgs / new particles

∗ need highest possible energy (or lowest)b. precision measurements of EW param’s

∗ sensitivity to H.O. effects from Higgs/New Physc. effects in rare processes

∗ New Phys couples to mass ⇒ t-,b-decays2. Where’s the Antimatter? Weak vs. Mass Eigenstates

a. Quarks ⇒ Mixing, CP Violation,…∗ B0, K0 decays

b. Leptons ⇒ Neutrino Oscillations∗ neutrino mass, mixing & CP

3. What about Matter? Strong Interactionsa. Perturbative vs. Non-perturb.


Stalking the HiggsStalking the Higgs

fit)(EW GeV 85 mfit)(EW GeV 196 m

(direct)GeV 114.3m

5434-H

H

H

+=

<>

LEP EW-WG: Winter 02 – Preliminary


And Beyond ?And Beyond ?There are lots of Ideas…• Dynamical Symmetry Breaking

Technicolor: ∗ running, walking, limping…

• Supersymmetry (SUSY) GMSSM, SUGRA, R-Parity

Violating• Large Extra Dimensions

testable string theory!

f−1(k2)

f1(k1)

KK f−2(q2)

f2(q1)

(a)

f−1(k2)

f1(k1)

KK V2(q2)

V1(q1)

(b) pp →ff pp → VV

• monojets

• single VB

• f,VB-pairs

SuperpartnersStandard Model

½1½0½10½0½0½SSparticleSParticle

RL q,q

RL ,ll

Lν

γ± ,Z,W 0

±H,A,H,h 000

g

RL q~,q~

RL~,~ ll

L~ν

±± χχ 21~,~

04

03

02

01

~,~,~,~ χχχχ

g~

MSSM: M(h) < 135 GeV !!!

They all answer some questions• Look like the SM at low E• Differences only show up at

high Energy small corr’s to SM predictions• etc., etc., etc….


Quarks are all mixed up !Quarks are all mixed up !Unitarity of VCKM ⇒ 12 eqn’s

the Unitarity Triangle is oneQuark Weak ≠ Mass Eigenstates

CKM Mixing Matrix

Independent param’s∗ 3 angles∗ 1 complex phase ⇒ CP-viol

Some Consequences

CP violation in K0, B0 systs

=

bsd

VVVVVVVVV

'b's'd

tbtstd

cbcscd

ubusud

mixing KK & BB 0000 −−

0=++ *tdtb

*cdcb

*udub VVVVVV

(0,1)

γ β

α

(0,0)

(ρ,η)

− *

ubud

*tbtd

VVVVarg

*cbcd

*tbtd

VVVV

− *

tbtd

*cbcd

VVVVarg

− *

cbcd

*ubud

VVVVarg

*cbcd

*ubud

VVVV


Sorting it OutSorting it Out• Many measurements

constrain CKM param’s but no real test of whether

CP-violation is described by SM or not

• Two Possibilities1. all angle/sides consistent w/

a triangle∗ Hooray for the SM !

2. no triangle fits all meas’s∗ New Physics !

• Why expect New Phys here? many beyond SM models

have additional CP-violation matter – antimatter asym not

consistent w/ SM CP

-0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6ρ

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

η

βγ

fromV V

ub

cb

from ε

Excluded byB mixings

m = 175±5 GeVt

from B mixingd

αAllowed

X)(B ν→ l

)(B −+ππ→

mixing)(B

)KJ/(B 0ψ→K)D ,hh(B s−+→


p-pbar Collisions: the Tevatronp-pbar Collisions: the TevatronThe Tevatron

world’s highest E accel. ~4 miles circumference >1000 supercond magnets

Run I Successes t-quark (1995) W-Mass Searches …

Upgrade Main Injector 1999 pbar Recycler Run 2b Start Mar 2001

4.82.32.5Int’s/X’ing1520.125fb-1Tot Lumi10517.33.2pb-1Lumi/week

196019601800[GeV]E-CM5.20.860.016[cm-2s-1]

(x1032)Typ. Lumi.

1323963500[ns]Spacing140x10336x366x6Bunches11

IIb05-08…

1.10.3(x1012)Tot. Anti-p

IIa01-04

Ib92-96


Collisions at the TevatronCollisions at the TevatronUnderlying

Event

u

u

d

gq

q u

u

d

Hard Scatterproton anti-proton

Advantages (re e+e-)• High Energy• Hard Scatter is QCD

Disadvantages (re e+e-)• Don’t know what’s colliding• Underlying Event• Hard Scatter is QCD


DØ CollaborationDØ Collaboration

>600 People 18 Countries


DØ Run II UpgradeDØ Run II Upgrade

• Old Strengths: Calorimeter, Central Muons• New Features: Magnetic Tracking, Silicon, Forward Muon,

3-Level Trigger, DAQ, Electronics


What We WantWhat We Want

1627—MeVMass res (J/→µµ)

1.6-10.7(Si) ; <132(COT)2.8-10.0(Si) ; <52(CFT)3.7-75cmRadii

Muon

Calo

Tracking

—18 ⊕0.3p%δP/P5.5-20beam shielding12-18λIShield

80% (cen)increase scint90%ϕ cover<1.5<2.0<3.6η accept

80/√E80/√E%Jet res16/√E14/√E%EM res

0.1×0.260.1×0.1∆η×∆ϕ

<3.6<4.0η acceptdE/dx,TOFPreShowerPID

14(rϕ) ; 50(rz)40(rϕ) ; 80(rz)—µmSec Vtx10-35(rϕ)15-30(rϕ)µmPrim Vtx6⊕22/pt13⊕50/pt—µmImp par

0.7⊕0.1pt2⊕0.2pt—%δPT/PT

<2.0(Si) ; <1.0(COT)<3.0(Si) ; <1.7 (CFT)<3.0η acceptT 1.42.00Field

CDF – Run II DØ – Run IIDØ – Run I


What We Have!What We Have!


Silicon Microstrip TrackerSilicon Microstrip Tracker~ 2.4 m

F-disks: 95.8% operational

SMT half cylinder

p-side pulse-height

1 MIP ≈ 4 fC ≈ 25 ADC counts

S/N > 10Efficiency 93-96%

Silicon Parameters 793k Channels 6 Barrels

+ 12 F-Disks+ 4 H-Disks

Coverage |η| < 3 3D Track Reco L2 Trigger

100% commissionedBarrels: 95.2% operational

H-disks: 86.5% operational


Silicon trackingSilicon trackingDistance of closest approach (cm)

Primary Vertex with SMT Tracking

Barrels+ disks

Barrelsonly Work in progress:

Integrating disks into tracking


Central Fiber TrackerCentral Fiber TrackerCFT Parameters

8 Layers axial/stereo fibers∗ 20 < r < 51 cm

77k Channels Readout by VLPCs

∗ 9K operating temp∗ 85% Q.E. – excellent S/N

L1 Trigger Pickoff

1 MIP~ 8 PE

ExcellentS/N

VLPC

Fiber Tracker

Axial: 100% readout Stereo: 52% readoutFully commissioned by mid-April


Track reconstructionTrack reconstruction

DCA: Distance ofClosest Approach

track

x

y“Global tracks”

SMT → CFTand

CFT → SMT

pT>3 GeV

60 µm

DCA resolution ~ 60 µm (without alignment!)beam spot ~ 30-40 µm


Central

Solenoid

Central PS

Tracking

Forward PS

CalorimetersForward

Calorimeter

PreshowerPreshowerPreshower Parameters

Triangular Scint. Fibers∗ Axial & Stereo

Coverage: |η| < 2.5 e-Trig Bgrd Rej: x 2–5

Forward PSSolenoid

Tracking Detectors: InstalledReadout: waiting for tracker electr’s


CalorimeterCalorimetercentral

calorimeter

south endcalorimeter

Calorimeter Parameters Uranium – LAr (stable, rad-hard)

Coverage: |η| < 4.2 (hermetic)

Granularity: ∆η×∆φ = 0.1×0.1 E-Res

∗ EM: 14%/√E ⊕ <1%∗ Jet: 80%/√E

Compensating: e/π ~ 1

eta

3.7

0.0

-3.7

-1.2

1.2

phi

0.0

2PI

ET GeV

140

Bins: 847Mean: 0.754Rms: 6.03Min: 0.00283Max: 136

E_t: 0.00878phi_t: 172deg

Run 132568 Event 444821 Wed Nov 14 08:57:20 2001

ηφ

3-jet eventET

jet1 ~ 310GeVET

jet2 ~ 240GeVET

jet3 ~ 110GeVMissing ET ~ 8GeV

100% commissioned~55K readout channels

~0.1% dead/noisy


Calorimeter performanceCalorimeter performance

• Missing ET important for New Physics SUSY, extra dimensions…

• MET Resolution from Data Inclusive di-electron sample ≥1 Track Match (Z, DY…)

Z → ee sampleno track match

Yellow = dataBlue = MC

, GeVTMissing E0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Ev

en

ts

02468

10121416182022

, correctedTME

Nent = 71 Mean = 8.43RMS = 4.61Under = 0Over = 0Chi2 / ndf = 6.694 / 6Prob = 0.35

0.6297 ±N = 3.763 0.4059 ±Sigma = 6.849

, GeVTMissing E0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Even

ts

02468

10121416182022

DØ Run 2 Preliminary

, correctedTME

Nent = 71 Mean = 8.43RMS = 4.61Under = 0Over = 0Chi2 / ndf = 6.694 / 6Prob = 0.35

0.6297 ±N = 3.763 0.4059 ±Sigma = 6.849

GeV 7~)E( T/σ

DØ Run 2 Preliminary

Snapshot of present performance

• EM energy scale from Z→e+e-

EM resolution modeled well by Monte Carlo


Muon SystemMuon SystemTrigger Scint (A-φ)

ScintPixels

Bottom B/C Scint

MDTs (Iarocci)

Shielding

Toroids

Muon Parameters Coverage: |η| < 2.0 Rough standalone P-meas Cosmic Rejection

∗ Added shielding∗ Time Resolution: 2.5 ns

PDTs(Run I)

Muon system 100% commissioned


Muon PerformanceMuon Performance

View 3, Plan (X-Z)

x

y z

Run 139930 Event 239390 Tue Feb 26 08:25:34 2002

CFT tracks match tomuon system

Z→µ+µ- CandidateM(µµ) ~ 103 GeV

Mini Drift TubesEff > 98%


Trigger HappyTrigger Happy

7.5 MHz(132 ns)

Beam X’ing

*m(H)=100 GeV56%22%

7 / day425 fb44%→only jets35%→e/µ + jets

~100%5 / hour7.2 pb0.2 Hz1 nb4.4 Hz22 nb10 kHz50 µb10 MHz50 mb

Rate(L=2x1032)

X-Sector BR

Process Conclusion: too much Physics!

L14.2 µs

(128 terms)

L2100 µs

(128 terms)

L350 ms

(48 nodes)

7 MHz• Single Sub-Det’s

• Towers, Tracks,ET-miss

• Some correl’s

• Not deadtimeless

• Correlations

• Calibrated Data

• Physics Objects e,µ,j,τ,ET-miss

• Simple Reco

• Physics Algo’s

5 kHz

1 kHz

50 Hz

F’work

Data

pp Inelastic)( bbpp 1y <→

WXpp →XbbZXpp →→

ttpp →

bbWW -+→

H(*) W/Zpp →bb e/ +µ

bb qq +


DØ L1 & L2 TriggersDØ L1 & L2 Triggers

CAL

c/f PS

CFT

SMT

MU

FPD

L1Cal

L1PS

L1CTT

L1Mu

L1FPD

L2Cal

L2PS

L2CTT

L2STT

L2Mu

Global L2Framework

Detector

Lumi

Level 1 Level 27 Mhz 5 khz 1 khz

Level 3


Trigger SystemsTrigger Systems

Rate

(H

z)

Luminosity (1030 cm-2s-1)

central

forward

Mu L1 rate vs. lumi

• Level-1 Calorimeter, Muon working Track ~May

• Level-2 Rejecting events ~now Silicon Track Trig summer

• Level-3 Linux Farm working

• DAQ → Ethernet/SBC Full system summer

Highest Et Central Jet Transverse Energy (GeV)0 50 100 150 200 250 300

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

JT_MX 2C Turn On Curve Using ‘‘L3MarkPass’’

L3 Jet turn-on

[GeV]Tp0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

Data

/T

0

100

200

300

400

500| < 0.7η |

JT_LO30L1 Jet turn-on


some Run II Physicssome Run II Physics

25%Single top3%Vtb

3%Pol(t→bWo)~180 GeV *>114 GeVSM Higgsn

ew

300 GeV>270 GeVsquark/gluino1 TeV>700 GeVW’ / Z’0.030.82±0.08CP (sin 2β)B6%AFB(B→K*µ+µ-)

20-30>22Bs Mixing (xs)

10%5.6 ±1.8 pb<2 GeV174.3±5.1 GeVM(t)T

op

Anom CouplingsM(W)Topic

<0.1<0.3 – 0.5<0.040 GeV80.427±0.046 GeVE

W

Run II Sens. (2 fb-1 / *20 fb-1)Now (World Ave)

)ttpp( →σ


Physics Galore!Physics Galore!• Run II Tevatron Working Groups

http://www-theory.fnal.gov• Publications

Higgs hep-ph/0010338 SUGRA hep-ph/0003154 BTMSSM hep-ph/0006162 RPV hep-ph/9906224 GM SUSY hep-ph/0008070 Electroweak Fermilab-PUB-00/297 Top see web (above) B hep-ph/0201071

http://www-theory.fnal.gov/

http://www-theory.fnal.gov/


Taking What We GetTaking What We GetNo single limit to Tev lumi

~8 contributing items p bunch intensity, pbar

xfer eff., etc. Will be improved over next

12 months

Delivered Luminosity

2002 Projections

DØ Roll-InRun 2 Start

1st Collisions

Detector Commissioning, timing, improve electronics, DAQ, offline

Instrument Fiber Tracker

Data Shown Here


ElectroweakElectroweak

Z→ee selection

SMT+CFT Global tracks

Z→ee candidatemee = 93.2 GeV

W→eν candidatesET(cluster)/PT(track)≥1 Track-Clust Match

W & Z X-Sect’sConsist. w/ expect

W MTvs MC


eta

3.7

0.0

-3.7

-1.2

1.2

phi

0.0

2PI

ET GeV

70

Run 141155 Event 154798 Thu Feb 28 01:44:52 2002

Electron

MET

j1 j2j3

j4

Top: W + 4 JetsTop: W + 4 Jets

eta

3.7

0.0

-3.7

-1.2

1.2

phi

0.0

2PI

ET GeV

35

Run 142344 Event 1669603 Thu Feb 28 01:42:39 2002

ElectronMET

j1

j2

j3

j4

ET = 26GeVη = 1.83ϕ = 2.90

j4ET = 35 GeVη = 1.27ϕ = 2.29

j3

MET = 62 GeV, MT(e1+MET) = 156 GeV

j2j1e1ET = 57 GeVη = 0.69ϕ = 3.38

ET = 68 GeVη = 1.62ϕ = 6.03

ET = 99 GeVη = -0.53ϕ = 5.94trackmatch

ngle

ET = 20GeVη = -1.43ϕ = 4.60

j4ET = 21 GeVη = 0.52ϕ = 5.80

j3

MET = 30 GeV, MT(e1+MET) = 79 GeV

j2j1e1ET = 24 GeVη = 2.41ϕ = 1.62

ET = 28 GeVη = 0.73ϕ = 3.82

ET = 52 GeVη = -0.51ϕ = 1.63Track match

+ observe siction

p produto


E-W ProjectionsE-W Projections

5.5%0.91 ± 0.39BR(t→Wob)(V-A check)

3 × 1065 × 1030t X / yr1071.4 × 104~100

<15%20%(|Vtb| to 12%)

<13.5< ± 2± 2.7 (1.6)174.3 ± 5.1Mt [GeV]

± 0.02-0.01± 0.010 (NLC)

± 0.03080.451 ±0.033

MW [GeV]

huge4.4 × 1071.5 × 104

(LEP2)W / yr

LHC (10 fb-1)DØ (2 fb-1)CurrentMeasRun II Projection

/ yrtt

tX)p(p →σ


B PhysicsB Physics

Mean = 3.08 ± 0.04 GeVSigma = 0.78 ± 0.08 GeV

KS→π+π-: Si-only Tracking

J/ψ→µ+µ-: Mu-only Tracking

Muons + CFT

Very preli

minary!

Connect tracks

MuonSystem

standalone


B cross sectionsB cross sections• X-Sect shape consist. w/ Run

1 results in same kin. reg.• PT of muon rel. to jet

Muon + jet cross section

~ 0.2 pb-1

Includes trigger, reconstruction andjet energy scale corrections

= evidence for b-quark contentbb di-muon candidate

pTrel = 1.25 GeV/c

pTrel = 1.01 GeV/c


B-Physics ProjectionsB-Physics Projections

FB Asymm22007000B → K* µ+ µ-

*Λb → J/ψΛ± 0.11*1.23 ± 0.08τ(Λb) [ps]Bc → J/ψ l ν60020N(Bc)

3.3 ×104~11000N(Bd→K+K-)sin2α2.4 ×104~600~200N(Bd→π+π-)

*Bs → Ds l X>75~30*>22xs

B → J/ψ KoS± 0.02

(±0.06 BaBar)± 0.030.82 ± 0.08sin2β

in acceptComments

1.5×10116×10105×107 (BaBar)

BTeV (2 fb-1)DØ (2 fb-1)CurrentMeasurement / yrbb

Also watch for• b Production x-section & correlations• Bs → Ds K, J/ψ φ, …• Bd mixing• B-hadron properties: lifetimes, spectroscopy, polarization, Onia


New Phenomena?New Phenomena?

EM

µ1

µ2

eµµ candidate event

Tri-Lepton(SUSY: χ+χ0)

+z

γγ - MET

(gauge med SUSY breaking)

MET =31.8 GeV

mµµ = 41.5 GeV

µ2µ1e

pT = 9.82η = -1.48ϕ = 2.88Charge = 1

pT = 28.2η = -0.10ϕ = 6.20Charge = -1

ET = 19.2 GeVη = 0.40ϕ = 0.63No trackmatch

MET = 34.3 GeV; M(diEM) = 53 GeV

EM2EM1

ET = 26.0 GeVη = 1.54ϕ = 5.86No track match

ET = 27.4 GeVη = 0.52ϕ = 3.78Loose trk match (low-pT)


SearchesSearches

2000900-1200>500-600MZ’ [GeV]D–4 = 2–76–8 2.1–3.5>1.0–1.4LED: MS [TeV]

3%11%<45%t →b H+

10-5 in SUSY1 ×10-40.3%<3.2%t →q γ10-4 in SUSY2 ×10-42%<33%t →q Z

*mainly χχ~all180–280*> ~100 (LEP2)m1/2 [GeV]

h,H,Aallalmost all 5σexcl tanβ: 0.9-7.7 / 0.5-2.3

SUSY (tanβ,MA)

< 1000180 (3σ)>114.1MH [GeV]MH = 100 GeVComments

5 ×1049 ×10350 (Run I)W(Z)HSM

LHC (100 fb-1)DØ (20 fb-1)CurrentMeasurement

Also watch for (list limited by imagination)• SUSY particle zoo• Technicolor• Your favorite Beyond the SM theory


The HiggsThe Higgs

1

10

10 2

102

103

mH (GeV)

Sig

nal s

igni

fica

nce

H → γ γ + WH, ttH (H → γ γ ) ttH (H → bb) H → ZZ(*) → 4 l

H → ZZ → llνν H → WW → lνjj

H → WW(*) → lνlν

Total significance

5 σ

∫ L dt = 100 fb-1

(no K-factors)

ATLAS

LHC

5σ

100 GeV1000 GeV

• Can Probe M(h) < 180 GeV

• But… Need the Luminosity!

⇒ Run 2b !!!


Upgrading the UpgradeUpgrading the Upgrade• Need >15 fb-1 to achieve

Higgs discovery potential• Tevatron Upgrade

Luminosity ∗ 1→5×1032 cm-2s-1

Beam Crossing Angle∗ Beam z-size: 25 →15 cm

Timescale: 2005• DØ Upgrade

Goal: minimize changes Replace Silicon

∗ Radiation damage to 2a det.∗ Use SS det’s back-to-back

Upgrade Trigger (esp L1)∗ L1 Rates >> 5 kHz limit∗ Track: tighter roads∗ Calorim: Dig. Filt + Cluster∗ Cal-Track Matching

Run2b Silicon

• 6 Layers

• r = 1.9-16.4 cm

• |η| < 2.0

• 925k channels

L1 rate (kHz)

0.3

0.5

0.5Upgr

10H→ττTrack Trigger2Trks (5,10GeV) + Iso + EM>2GeV

2ZH→ννbb

Jet Trigger2 H+EM towers Σ > 4GeV

9W→eνEM TriggerTower > 10 GeV

OldPhysTrigger


ConclusionsConclusionsWhat can we conclude???

We’ve barely started!!!

DØ vs. The Standard Model Fightcard

etc…etc…etc…2–3.5 TeVLED

700 evtsK*µ+µ-×10–40rare top12%|Vtb|30xsmost 5σtanβ,MA1.6 GeVMt

0.0318030 MeV sin2βHSMMW

Quark M vs Weak (2 fb-1)Searches (20 fb-1)Precision (2 fb-1)

The D0 Experiment - nevis.columbia.eduevans/talks/osu02.pdf · H.Evans OSU Seminar - 10-Apr-02 1...

Documents

Transcript of The D0 Experiment - nevis.columbia.eduevans/talks/osu02.pdf · H.Evans OSU Seminar - 10-Apr-02 1...