2015:groups:sm:qg
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:sm:qg [2015/06/04 16:37] jesse.thaler |
2015:groups:sm:qg [2015/06/04 17:07] jesse.thaler [Core Jet Shapes] |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| 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) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Analysis Workflow ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Rivet analysis in place which computes from a HepMC event sample the various generalised angularity distributions. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Questions ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Is discrimination power (e.g. for width) coming from the hadronization regime? | ||
| + | * | ||
| ===== Next Les Houches Study (for after LH) ===== | ===== Next Les Houches Study (for after LH) ===== | ||
2015/groups/sm/qg.txt · Last modified: 2015/07/14 08:27 by philippe.gras
Page Tools
Except where otherwise noted, content on this wiki is licensed under the following license: Public Domain
