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 16:41]
jesse.thaler [Supplemental Jet Shapes]
2015:groups:sm:qg [2015/06/06 17:33]
philippe.gras
Line 6: Line 6:
   * Jon Butterworth   * Jon Butterworth
   * Mario Campanelli   * Mario Campanelli
-  * Marat Freytsis+  * Marat Freytsis ​<​freytsis@physics.harvard.edu>​
   * Peter Loch <​loch@physics.arizona.edu>​   * Peter Loch <​loch@physics.arizona.edu>​
-  * Deepak Kar +  * Deepak Kar <​deepak.kar@cern.ch>​ 
-  * Andrzej Siodmok+  * Simon Plätzer 
 +  * Andrzej Siodmok ​<​andrzej@cern.ch>​
   * Peter Skands <​peter.skands@monash.edu>​   * Peter Skands <​peter.skands@monash.edu>​
   * Dave Soper   * Dave Soper
Line 15: Line 16:
   * Frank Tackmann   * Frank Tackmann
   * Jesse Thaler <​jthaler@mit.edu>​   * Jesse Thaler <​jthaler@mit.edu>​
 +  * Philippe Gras <​philippe.gras@cern.ch>​
   * ...   * ...
  
Line 79: Line 81:
   * 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 104: Line 127:
   * 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 119: Line 143:
   * 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 138: Line 164:
  
   * Rivet analysis in place which computes from a HepMC event sample the various generalised angularity distributions.   * 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 ====
-===== Next Les Houches Study (for after LH) ===== +
- +
-  * Above study at hadron colliders, using dijets, W/Z/gamma + j, and maybe t tbar samples +
- +
-===== Preliminary plots for meeting on Thursday ​=====+
  
 {{:​2015:​groups:​sm:​ga_10_20.pdf|}} {{:​2015:​groups:​sm:​ga_10_20.pdf|}}
Line 151: Line 188:
 {{:​2015:​groups:​sm:​ga_00_00.pdf|}} {{:​2015:​groups:​sm:​ga_00_00.pdf|}}
 {{:​2015:​groups:​sm:​ga_20_00.pdf|}} {{:​2015:​groups:​sm:​ga_20_00.pdf|}}
 +
 +==== 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 ===== ===== Notes from Tuesday Meeting =====
Line 352: Line 411:
  
 </​code>​ </​code>​
 +
 +===== Notes for Jesse for Preparing Summary Talk =====
 +
 +  * Quark is more of an adjective than a noun.
 +  * Pseudo-quark? ​ (That language doesn'​t go over very well.)
 +
 +==== What is a Quark Jet? ====
 +
 +(From ill-defined to well-defined)
 +
 +  * A quark parton
 +  * A Born-level quark parton
 +  * The initiating quark parton in a final state shower
 +  * An eikonal line with baryon number 1/3 and carrying triplet color charge
 +  * A quark operator that appears in a hard matrix element in the context of a factorization theorem.
 +  * A parton-level jet object that has been tagged as a quark using a soft-safe flavored jet algorithm (automatically collinear safe if you sum constituent flavors).
 +  * A phase space region (as defined by an unambiguous hadronic fiducial cross section measurement) that yields an enriched sample of quarks (as interpreted by some suitable, though fundamentally ambiguous, criterion).  ​
 +  ​
 +(Sometimes people think we care about the top of the list while we are really focused entirely on the bottom.)
2015/groups/sm/qg.txt · Last modified: 2015/07/14 08:27 by philippe.gras