2017:groups:tools:contur
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision Last revision Both sides next revision | ||
|
2017:groups:tools:contur [2017/09/20 23:29] jonathan.butterworth [Light Scalar Particles] |
2017:groups:tools:contur [2017/10/02 10:43] jonathan.butterworth |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| * [[https://contur.hepforge.org/|Contur at HepForge]] | * [[https://contur.hepforge.org/|Contur at HepForge]] | ||
| * [[http://contur.hepforge.org/svn/|Contur sources]] (CLTestSingle works. Many improvements in progress.) | * [[http://contur.hepforge.org/svn/|Contur sources]] (CLTestSingle works. Many improvements in progress.) | ||
| - | * [[contur#2HDM Studies|2HDM Studies]] | + | * [[2HDM Studies]] |
| * [[2017:groups:higgs:fxsnp:susycascades|FXS: Higgs production from SUSY cascades]] | * [[2017:groups:higgs:fxsnp:susycascades|FXS: Higgs production from SUSY cascades]] | ||
| - | * [[contur#Light Scalar Particles|Light Scalar Particles]] | + | * [[Contur for Light Scalar Particles]] |
| - | * [[Explanation of Contur plot format]] | + | * [[http://contur.hepforge.org/share/plot-format.html|Explanation of Contur plot format]] |
| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ||
| Line 49: | Line 49: | ||
| However, you can see that the [[http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/~jmb/Work/LH/2HDM/8_WEAK/ATLAS_2016_I1426515/index.html|ATLAS WW measurement]] also has some exclusion - about 92%. I don't understand why the [[http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/~jmb/Work/LH/2HDM/8_WEAK/CMS_2017_I1467451/index.html|CMS H->WW]] one doesn't have an exclusion anywhere in the same league. Either the Higgs selection cuts suppress it or there is a bug/feature in the rivet routine (either ATLAS or CMS!). I will look into it. | However, you can see that the [[http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/~jmb/Work/LH/2HDM/8_WEAK/ATLAS_2016_I1426515/index.html|ATLAS WW measurement]] also has some exclusion - about 92%. I don't understand why the [[http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/~jmb/Work/LH/2HDM/8_WEAK/CMS_2017_I1467451/index.html|CMS H->WW]] one doesn't have an exclusion anywhere in the same league. Either the Higgs selection cuts suppress it or there is a bug/feature in the rivet routine (either ATLAS or CMS!). I will look into it. | ||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ||
| - | |||
| - | ==== Light Scalar Particles ==== | ||
| - | |||
| - | //Susan Shotkin Gascon-Shotkin, Linda Finco, Sijing Zhang, Grégory Moreau, Peter Richardson, Sylvain Fichet, David Grellscheid, Jon Butterworth, David Yallup...// | ||
| - | |||
| - | Joint with [[2017:groups:higgs:lsp|Higgs group]]. | ||
| - | |||
| - | === Herwig status === | ||
| - | |||
| - | <del>Herwig not dealing with UFO file properly. PR aiming to fix the 3D vertex.</del> | ||
| - | This is now fixed. Peter has implemented the relevant vertices in Herwig/ThePEG and its UFO interface, and validated the cross section against MadGraph. This is not yet in 7.1.1 but is in the Herwig 7 trunk in the | ||
| - | repository, hopefully in next release. The exception is the 5-point vertices which are used in the CP-even model: | ||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | Warning: Lorentz structure VVVVS ( g g g g phiNP ) in V_49 is not supported. | ||
| - | Warning: Lorentz structure VVSSS ( W- W+ H H phiNP ) in V_118 is not supported. | ||
| - | Warning: Lorentz structure VVVVS ( a a W- W+ phiNP ) in V_122 is not supported. | ||
| - | Warning: Lorentz structure VVVVS ( W- W- W+ W+ phiNP ) in V_126 is not supported. | ||
| - | Warning: Lorentz structure VVVVS ( a W- W+ Z phiNP ) in V_150 is not supported. | ||
| - | Warning: Lorentz structure VVSSS ( Z Z H H phiNP ) in V_156 is not supported. | ||
| - | Warning: Lorentz structure VVVVS ( W- W+ Z Z phiNP ) in V_160 is not supported. | ||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | These are currently ignored - hope they aren't a major effect (they don't look like they should be...) | ||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | === Some (preliminary!) results with Contur === | ||
| - | |||
| - | Suggested parameter ranges from Sylvain: | ||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | CP-even scalar: | ||
| - | mphi in [10, 100] GeV | ||
| - | f0B in [1, 10] TeV | ||
| - | f0W in [1, 10] TeV | ||
| - | f0H in [1, 10] TeV | ||
| - | |||
| - | CP-odd scalar: | ||
| - | mphi in [10, 100] GeV | ||
| - | f0B in [1, 10] TeV | ||
| - | f0W in [1, 10] TeV | ||
| - | |||
| - | For each case, all the other f's should be set to very large values. | ||
| - | |||
| - | So, here is a scan using these ranges for the CP-odd scalar model (f0 value labelled $\Lambda$ on the vertical axis, $M_\phi$ on the horizontal. | ||
| - | {{2017:groups:tools:colorbarkey.png}} | ||
| - | |||
| - | {{:2017:groups:tools:combinedcl_.png?400|}} | ||
| - | |||
| - | ... so this is looking pretty promising. Everything excluded except the lowest mass/highest scale. This needs to be carefully checked, of course. All the yellow region above is excluded by the ATLAS diphoton cross sections: [[http://inspirehep.net/record/1591327|arXiv:1704.03839]]. If those are not included, the [[http://inspirehep.net/record/1448301|ATLAS $Z+\gamma$ meaurements]] (in dilepton+photon and MET+photon) have quite some power on their own, see below. | ||
| - | |||
| - | {{:2017:groups:tools:combinedcl_zg.png?400|}} | ||
| - | Z+photon | ||
| - | |||
| - | {{:2017:groups:tools:combinedcl_metg.png?400|}} | ||
| - | Missing ET + photon | ||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | == Older Stuff == | ||
| - | |||
| - | Not really sure of what sensible parameter ranges would be at the moment, but here is an example run for CP-Odd scalar with some 8 TeV data. I (Jon) set $m_\phi = 80$ GeV, and setting the mass scales for the effective couplings at 50 or 100 TeV as follows: $f0B, f0W, f0H, f0gam, f0Z = 50$ TeV, $f0G, f0u, f0d, f0l = 100$ TeV. Total cross section is $4.4 pb^{-1}$. | ||
| - | |||
| - | The Contur "exclusion" for these parameters with the 8 TeV measurements currently in Rivet is at 77% cl. The exclusion dominantly comes from the ATLAS diphoton cross sections: [[http://inspirehep.net/record/1591327|arXiv:1704.03839]]. | ||
| - | The comparison plots are here for [[http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/~jmb/Work/LH/NSCPO/7_HAD/index.html|7 TeV]] [[http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/~jmb/Work/LH/NSCPO/8_HAD/index.html|8 TeV]]. You can see that the most significant exclusion is from the mass peak, though many other differential cross sections show a significant effect (they are not all combined, since they are the same events - only the most significant contributes to the overall c.l.) | ||
| - | |||
| - | I also made a run where I increased the couplings to weak bosons by setting $f0B, f0W, f0H, f0Z = 5$ TeV, just to see what happens. I also turned off the $\phi$+jet process, to focus on the electroweak-type signatures. The exclusion is now at 97% c.l., dominated by the ATLAS $W/Z + \gamma$ [[http://inspirehep.net/record/1448301|measurement]]. The results are here for [[http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/~jmb/Work/LH/NSCPO/7_WEAK/index.html|7 TeV]] and [[http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/~jmb/Work/LH/NSCPO/8_WEAK/index.html|8 TeV]] (8 TeV is by far the most interesting). | ||
| - | |||
| - | (Modulo BR changes, the exclusion from the diphotons would presumably still be similar to the above, since the production cross section is driven by $f0G$ which didn't change. This could be combined with the 97%, as the events are independent.) | ||
| - | |||
| - | Next step? Agree some sensible parameter ranges to scan, presumably mass and some subset of couplings; I can combine 7, 8 and 13 TeV limits, of course. | ||
| - | |||
2017/groups/tools/contur.txt · Last modified: 2017/10/02 10:44 by jonathan.butterworth
Page Tools
Except where otherwise noted, content on this wiki is licensed under the following license: Public Domain
