2015:groups:higgs:pseudoxsecs
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision Next revision Both sides next revision | ||
|
2015:groups:higgs:pseudoxsecs [2015/06/09 11:14] tania.robens [Discussion on Pseudo Observables/Cross Sections for Higgs Measurements] |
2015:groups:higgs:pseudoxsecs [2015/06/27 11:33] frank.tackmann |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| //If you are interested in contributing, please sign up [[2015:groups:topicsignup:pseudoxsecs|here]].// | //If you are interested in contributing, please sign up [[2015:groups:topicsignup:pseudoxsecs|here]].// | ||
| + | //This twiki page is closed -- session 2, we welcome your comments, and in particular suggestions on the BSM-motivated regions including proposals for the "BSM jokers" [[2015:groups:pseudoxsecsBSM|here]].// | ||
| + | //[Update]//: For an overview talk with some more details see [[https://indico.cern.ch/event/399923/session/3/contribution/20/material/slides/0.pdf|here]] (corresponding to 2nd iteration below). | ||
| ==== Goal: ==== | ==== Goal: ==== | ||
| Line 43: | Line 45: | ||
| For 2nd iteration: Reduce number of bins, classify according to importance/feasibility | For 2nd iteration: Reduce number of bins, classify according to importance/feasibility | ||
| - | Note: "ggF", "VBF", ... describe the kinematics/topology, not necessarily only the SM production mode. (Can think of it as "simplified kinematic model".) | + | == Notes: == |
| + | |||
| + | * "ggF-topology", "VBF-topology", ... describe the SM-like kinematic topology, not necessarily only the SM production mode. So one can think of it as using the SM itself as a "simplified kinematic model". (In practice, on the experimental side the corresponding SM processes are used to evaluate and unfold the acceptance corrections.) | ||
| * everything is meant schematically, all numbers are just for illustration | * everything is meant schematically, all numbers are just for illustration | ||
| * In the future, can add additional non-SM-like kinematic templates (e.g. CP-odd ggF) | * In the future, can add additional non-SM-like kinematic templates (e.g. CP-odd ggF) | ||
| - | == ggF-like == | + | == ggF-topology == |
| =0j \\ | =0j \\ | ||
| =1j, separate bin for pTj>~100 GeV (or pTH>~100 GeV) \\ | =1j, separate bin for pTj>~100 GeV (or pTH>~100 GeV) \\ | ||
| Line 54: | Line 58: | ||
| * inputs: gammagamma, ZZ, WW, tautau (for 1j > 100 GeV, 2j VBF and >=3j) | * inputs: gammagamma, ZZ, WW, tautau (for 1j > 100 GeV, 2j VBF and >=3j) | ||
| - | == VBF-like == | + | == VBF-topology == |
| main: mjj >~ 300 GeV (and have some rest 120-300 to not lose any region) \\ | main: mjj >~ 300 GeV (and have some rest 120-300 to not lose any region) \\ | ||
| more possibilities: mjj, pTj, Deltaetajj \\ | more possibilities: mjj, pTj, Deltaetajj \\ | ||
| Line 64: | Line 68: | ||
| * inputs: gammagamma, ZZ, WW, tautau, bbbar | * inputs: gammagamma, ZZ, WW, tautau, bbbar | ||
| - | == VH-like (V -> hadrons) == | + | == VH-topology (V -> hadrons) == |
| mjj 70 - 120 GeV \\ | mjj 70 - 120 GeV \\ | ||
| m(VH) = [0, 300, 600, inf] (more ideal from theory side) \\ | m(VH) = [0, 300, 600, inf] (more ideal from theory side) \\ | ||
| Line 73: | Line 77: | ||
| * Need to think about how to best deal with the overlap between VBF and VHhad | * Need to think about how to best deal with the overlap between VBF and VHhad | ||
| - | == VH-like (V -> leptons) == | + | == VH-topology (V -> leptons) == |
| keep the Z and W separately: Z->ll, Z->nunu, W->lnu \\ | keep the Z and W separately: Z->ll, Z->nunu, W->lnu \\ | ||
| same bins as for VHhad (need to see how well this works with neutrinos) \\ | same bins as for VHhad (need to see how well this works with neutrinos) \\ | ||
| - | * inputs: bbbar, gamgam, ZZ, WW, tautau | + | * inputs: bbbar, gamgam, ZZ, WW, tautau |
| - | == gg->ZH-like == | + | == gg->ZH-topology == |
| as for VH, likely fewer bins (more relevant for higher pT(V), m(VH)) \\ | as for VH, likely fewer bins (more relevant for higher pT(V), m(VH)) \\ | ||
| Line 91: | Line 95: | ||
| == tHW, tHjq == | == tHW, tHjq == | ||
| inclusive and then as few kinematic parameters as possible | inclusive and then as few kinematic parameters as possible | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | ==== 2nd iteration ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Notes: == | ||
| + | |||
| + | * jets are assumed as anti-kt 0.4, |eta|<4-5, pT>=25-30 GeV | ||
| + | * bins are exclusive (in the selection, start from the lowest bin on the list) | ||
| + | |||
| + | * "ggF-topology", "VBF-topology", ... describe the SM-like kinematic topology, not necessarily only the SM production mode. So one can think of it as using the SM itself as a "simplified kinematic model". (In practice, on the experimental side the corresponding SM processes are used to evaluate and unfold the acceptance corrections.) | ||
| + | * explicit numbers are only meant as ball-park numbers | ||
| + | |||
| + | Proposal for two reduced scenarios, "small" and "medium", trying to take into account feasibility with current statistics, theoretical uncertainties, and sensitivity to BSM. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | == ggF-topology == | ||
| + | |||
| + | SMALL\\ | ||
| + | 0j\\ | ||
| + | >=1j, split into pTH < = mH, pTH = mH - 200 GeV, pTH > 200 GeV (highest bin for BSM)\\ | ||
| + | >=2 VBF (mjj, Deltaetajj cuts as for VBF), split into =2 and >=3 by a pTHjj cut\\ | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | MEDIUM\\ | ||
| + | split pTH > 200 GeV into 200 GeV - high, and > high\\ | ||
| + | split >=1j to =1j and >=2j (with the pTH splitting)\\ | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | == VBF-topology == | ||
| + | |||
| + | SMALL\\ | ||
| + | rest\\ | ||
| + | >=2j, with mjj and Deltaetajj cuts, split into =2 and >=3 by a pTHjj cut\\ | ||
| + | "high-q^2" bin (can be replaced by something else BSMy, could be high pTj1)\\ | ||
| + | |||
| + | MEDIUM\\ | ||
| + | allow for continuous parameter to allow for contribution of CP odd coupling | ||
| + | (interference is probably irrelevant, but could check)\\ | ||
| + | another "BSM joker" (TBD by session 2)\\ | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | == VH-topology == | ||
| + | |||
| + | SMALL\\ | ||
| + | exclusive in ll+nunu, lnu, had\\ | ||
| + | pT(V) = 0 - mH (low) and mH - inf (high)\\ | ||
| + | split high in =0j, >=1j\\ | ||
| + | pT(V) > 200 GeV (for BSM) | ||
| + | |||
| + | MEDIUM\\ | ||
| + | split ll and nunu\\ | ||
| + | split low pT(V) bin into 0j and >=1j\\ | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | == gg->VH-topology == | ||
| + | |||
| + | same as for VH, if completely degenerate can give the sum of VH and gg->VH | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | == ttH == | ||
| + | |||
| + | SMALL\\ | ||
| + | 1 incl bin\\ | ||
| + | |||
| + | MEDIUM\\ | ||
| + | split into 0j, >=1j additional jets (with a rather high pT cut, maybe 50-100 GeV?)\\ | ||
| + | add "BSM joker" (to be defined by session 2) | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | == bbH == | ||
| + | |||
| + | MEDIUM\\ | ||
| + | 1 incl bin | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | == tH == | ||
| + | |||
| + | MEDIUM\\ | ||
| + | 1 incl bin | ||
2015/groups/higgs/pseudoxsecs.txt · Last modified: 2015/07/14 08:23 by philippe.gras
Page Tools
Except where otherwise noted, content on this wiki is licensed under the following license: Public Domain
