User Tools

Site Tools


2015:groups:sm:qg

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
Next revision Both sides next revision
2015:groups:sm:qg [2015/06/04 16:37]
jesse.thaler [Original Notes from Gregory]
2015:groups:sm:qg [2015/06/04 17:18]
jesse.thaler
Line 3: Line 3:
 a.k.a. Hunting the White Whale of Jet Substructure a.k.a. Hunting the White Whale of Jet Substructure
  
 +  * Andy Buckley
   * Jon Butterworth   * Jon Butterworth
 +  * Mario Campanelli
   * Marat Freytsis   * Marat Freytsis
   * Peter Loch <​loch@physics.arizona.edu>​   * Peter Loch <​loch@physics.arizona.edu>​
Line 11: Line 13:
   * Dave Soper   * Dave Soper
   * Gregory Soyez   * Gregory Soyez
 +  * Frank Tackmann
   * Jesse Thaler <​jthaler@mit.edu>​   * Jesse Thaler <​jthaler@mit.edu>​
-  * who did I forget? +  * ...
- +
-  * Remotely: ​ Andy Buckley, Mario Campanelli+
  
 Link to GitHub repository: ​ https://​github.com/​gsoyez/​lh2015-qg Link to GitHub repository: ​ https://​github.com/​gsoyez/​lh2015-qg
Line 78: Line 79:
   * ATLAS A14 tune already uses jet shapes, and finds that alpha_s has to be tuned downward in Pythia 8.  This, however, has a detrimental effect on LEP measurements,​ so one has to be cautious about this.   * ATLAS A14 tune already uses jet shapes, and finds that alpha_s has to be tuned downward in Pythia 8.  This, however, has a detrimental effect on LEP measurements,​ so one has to be cautious about this.
   * Is there a tuning flat direction?   * Is there a tuning flat direction?
 +
 +
 +==== Hemisphere quark/gluon definitions in e+e- ====
 +
 +  * Consider the case of e+ e- -> q qbar.  Partition event into (thrust) hemisphere, define hemisphere flavor by summing over flavors of hemisphere constituents.
 +  * At LO, we can unambiguously define hemisphere flavors.
 +  * At NLO, we can also unambiguously define flavor via hemisphere, though there is now a small gluon fraction from gluon recoiling against q qbar pair.
 +  * At NNLO, things are more complicated.
 +    * Can have soft gluon splitting into q-qbar in different hemispheres,​ creates IRC safety issue.
 +    * One can use a flavored algorithm (BSZ) to define the flavour of two flavor-kt jets
 +  * Ultimately, want to give an operational definition of flavor based on the Born-level operator contributing to the process.
 +    * Claim: ​ all subtleties are formally power suppressed.
 +    * Use case, VBF, two jets with a third jet veto, q/g well-defined in the exclusive limit.
 +
 +==== Flavored Jet Algorithms ====
 +
 +  * This is a topic worthy of its own Les Houches study.
 +  * For pp collisions, multiple possible uses of flavored jet algorithms.
 +  * One can just run flavor-kT
 +  * Or one can run flavor-kT to define flavor ghosts, and run standard anti-kT.
 +  * Or one can run flavor-kT for deflavoring constituents,​ and then run standard anti-kT.
  
 ===== Ultimate Goal for Les Houches Study ===== ===== Ultimate Goal for Les Houches Study =====
Line 93: Line 115:
  
   * Do we understand FSR modeling by workhorse parton showers?   * Do we understand FSR modeling by workhorse parton showers?
 +  * Start with the clean case of e+e-, move to pp later.
  
 ==== Basic Plan === ==== Basic Plan ===
Line 102: Line 125:
   * Question: use ROC curves or mutual information (I(T;A)) to quantify discrimination power?   * Question: use ROC curves or mutual information (I(T;A)) to quantify discrimination power?
     * Answer: doesn'​t really matter, probably I(T;A) is easier to begin with.     * Answer: doesn'​t really matter, probably I(T;A) is easier to begin with.
 +    * Better answer: ​ Use separation (S-B)^2 / (2 (S + B)).
  
 ==== Core Jet Shapes ==== ==== Core Jet Shapes ====
Line 117: Line 141:
   * Question: ​ Sum over particles (angularity-style) vs. sum over pairs (ECF-style)   * Question: ​ Sum over particles (angularity-style) vs. sum over pairs (ECF-style)
     * Answer: ​ Sum over particles (angularity-style)     * Answer: ​ Sum over particles (angularity-style)
 +  * Question: ​ Plot linear or log scale?
 +    * Answer: ​ Do both if it makes sense, better for angularities to have log scale.
  
 ==== Supplemental Jet Shapes ==== ==== Supplemental Jet Shapes ====
Line 132: Line 158:
   * Generalized angularities with soft-drop jets, varying beta_SD   * Generalized angularities with soft-drop jets, varying beta_SD
   * Do sum over pairs version of angularities (i.e. ECF-style)   * Do sum over pairs version of angularities (i.e. ECF-style)
-===== Next Les Houches Study (for after LH) ===== 
  
-  * Above study at hadron colliders, using dijets, W/Z/gamma + j, and maybe t tbar samples+==== Analysis Workflow ====
  
-===== Preliminary plots for meeting on Thursday ​=====+  * Rivet analysis in place which computes from a HepMC event sample the various generalised angularity distributions. 
 +  * Processes to consider: 
 +    * mu+mu- -> spin1 -> q qbar  take photons 
 +    * mu+mu- -> spin0 -> g g  take Higgs 
 +    * for tests of universality: ​ mu+mu- -> spin0 -> q qbar 
 +  * Energies 
 +    * Q=sqrt{s} = 50, 200, 800 GeV 
 +    * Optionally: ​ Q = 100, 400 GeV 
 +  * Jet definition:​ 
 +    * ee-antikt [genkt, p=-1], WTA_modp recomb scheme 
 +    * R = 0.3, 0.6, 0.9 
 +  * Add thrust from thrust hemispheres for anticipated analytic comparisons 
 +  * Add multiplicity (event-wide) in bins of thrust: 
 +     * T < 5 GeV/​sqrt(S) 
 +     * 5 GeV/sqrt(S) < T < 0.1 
 +     * 0.1 < T < 0.2 
 +     * 0.2 < T 
 + 
 +==== Preliminary plots for meeting on Thursday ====
  
 {{:​2015:​groups:​sm:​ga_10_20.pdf|}} {{:​2015:​groups:​sm:​ga_10_20.pdf|}}
Line 144: Line 187:
 {{:​2015:​groups:​sm:​ga_20_00.pdf|}} {{:​2015:​groups:​sm:​ga_20_00.pdf|}}
  
-===== Notes from Tuesday ​Morning ​=====+==== Questions ==== 
 + 
 +  * Is discrimination power (e.g. for width) coming from the hadronization regime? 
 +    * Possibility: ​ Isolate hadronization regime (thrust ~ LambdaQCD/​Q) and shower regime (thrust ~ 0.1-0.2) and optionally hard jet regime (thrust >~ 0.25). ​ Study scaling of, e.g., multiplicity as a function of Q in each of these regimes. 
 +  * By testing pythia vs. herwig, can we test string vs. cluster hadronization?​ 
 +  * Is there jet radius dependence?​ 
 +  * Does matching help in controlling quark/gluon uncertainties?​ 
 +  * Universality/​process dependence of conclusions?​ 
 +    * Related to whether the discrimination power comes from the core or the periphery of jet. 
 + 
 +===== Next Les Houches Study (for after LH) ===== 
 + 
 +  * Above study at hadron colliders, using dijets, W/Z/gamma + j, and maybe t tbar samples 
 + 
 +===== Analytic Les Houches Study? ===== 
 + 
 +  * Analytic predictions known/​available/​straightforward for: 
 +    * Quark thrust: N^3LL' + N^3L0 
 +    * Gluon thrust: N^2LL' + N^2L0 
 +    * ang (kappa =1):  NLL' 
 +  * Can we do useful quark/gluon study from analytic results? 
 + 
 +===== Notes from Tuesday ​Meeting ​=====
  
 <​code>​ <​code>​
2015/groups/sm/qg.txt · Last modified: 2015/07/14 08:27 by philippe.gras