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 | ||
2017:groups:tools:contur_for_light_scalar_particles [2017/09/30 18:13] jonathan.butterworth |
2017:groups:tools:contur_for_light_scalar_particles [2017/10/01 11:25] jonathan.butterworth |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 48: | Line 48: | ||
... so this looks promising. Everything excluded except the lowest mass/highest scale. This needs to be carefully checked, of course - see below. Basically 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 $Z+\gamma$ measurements]] (in dilepton+photon and MET+photon) have quite some power on their own, see below. | ... so this looks promising. Everything excluded except the lowest mass/highest scale. This needs to be carefully checked, of course - see below. Basically 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 $Z+\gamma$ measurements]] (in dilepton+photon and MET+photon) have quite some power on their own, see below. | ||
- | {{:2017:groups:tools:combinedcl_zg.png?200|}} $l^+l^- + \gamma$ | + | {{:2017:groups:tools:cl_78wzg_nso.png?200|}} $(l^+l^-)$ or $(l + E_T^{\rm miss}) + \gamma$ |
- | {{:2017:groups:tools:combinedcl_metg.png?200|}} | + | {{:2017:groups:tools:cl_8metg_nso.png?200|}} $E_T^{\rm miss} + \gamma$ |
- | Missing ET + $\gamma$ | + | {{:2017:groups:tools:cl_78photons_nso.png?200|}} Inclusive and di-photons |
Here are the plots from some of the points on the grid. (See [[http://contur.hepforge.org/share/plot-format.html|here]] for an explanation of the plot format.) | Here are the plots from some of the points on the grid. (See [[http://contur.hepforge.org/share/plot-format.html|here]] for an explanation of the plot format.) | ||
Line 56: | Line 56: | ||
== $M_\phi = 10$ GeV, $\Lambda = 3.5$ TeV == | == $M_\phi = 10$ GeV, $\Lambda = 3.5$ TeV == | ||
- | > [[http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/~jmb/Work/LH/NSCPO/8TeV/mP_10_f0_3500/contur-plots/|Page of plots]]: The most powerful exclusion comes from the $\gamma + E_T^{\rm miss}$ channel, specifically the $E_T^\gamma$ differential cross section for events with no jets, in [[http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/~jmb/Work/LH/NSCPO/8TeV/mP_10_f0_3500/contur- | + | > [[http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/~jmb/Work/LH/NSCPO/8TeV/mP_10_f0_3500/contur-plots/|Page of plots]]: The most powerful exclusion in the 8 TeV data comes from the $\gamma + E_T^{\rm miss}$ channel, specifically the $E_T^\gamma$ differential cross section for events with no jets, in [[http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/~jmb/Work/LH/NSCPO/8TeV/mP_10_f0_3500/contur-plots/ATLAS_2016_I1448301_NU/index.html|this paper]]. There is also some exclusion from the $\tau$ distribution in the $H \rightarrow \gamma\gamma$ paper - see below for more on that. Also once the 7 TeV data are included, the inclusive and diphotons cover much of the parameter space on their own. |
- | plots/ATLAS_2016_I1448301_NU/index.html|this paper]]. There is also some exclusion from the $\tau$ distribution in the $H \rightarrow \gamma\gamma$ paper - see below for more on that. | + | |
== $M_\phi = 20$ GeV, $\Lambda = 3.5$ TeV == | == $M_\phi = 20$ GeV, $\Lambda = 3.5$ TeV == | ||
Line 65: | Line 64: | ||
== $M_\phi = 80$ GeV, $\Lambda = 7.5$ TeV == | == $M_\phi = 80$ GeV, $\Lambda = 7.5$ TeV == | ||
- | > [[http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/~jmb/Work/LH/NSCPO/8TeV/mP_80_f0_7500/contur-plots/|Page of plots]]: This point is chosen to look at the higher end of the $M_\phi$ range, where the sensitivity is greater, and so we look at a high $\Lambda$ value. Again the sensitivity is driven by the $\gamma + E_T^{\rm miss}$ cross section in [[http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/~jmb/Work/LH/NSCPO/8TeV/mP_80_f0_7500/contur-plots/ATLAS_2016_I1448301_NU/index.html|this paper]]. | + | > [[http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/~jmb/Work/LH/NSCPO/8TeV/mP_80_f0_7500/contur-plots/|Page of plots]]: This point is chosen to look at the higher end of the $M_\phi$ range, where the sensitivity is greater, and so we look at a high $\Lambda$ value. Again the sensitivity is driven by [[http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/~jmb/Work/LH/NSCPO/8TeV/mP_80_f0_7500/contur-plots/ATLAS_2016_I1448301_NU/index.html|this paper]], but now it is the $\gamma\gamma + E_T^{\rm miss}$ cross section that does the work. |
== CP-even results== | == CP-even results== | ||
Line 71: | Line 70: | ||
A similar run for the CP-even scalar model, using the parameters sugested by Sylvain, gives the heatmap below: | A similar run for the CP-even scalar model, using the parameters sugested by Sylvain, gives the heatmap below: | ||
- | {{:2017:groups:tools:combinedcl_8cpe.png}}?300|}} {{:2017:groups:tools:contur_8cpe.png?300|}}. | + | {{:2017:groups:tools:cl_78cpe.png?300|}}{{:2017:groups:tools:contur_78cpe.png?300|}} |
- | (This is 8 TeV only, will update.) Again, the inclusive diphotons and the Z+jet results both have significant sensitivity. | + | This is 7 and 8 TeV only, but the currently available 13 TeV results have no real impact as there are no photon measurements in Rivet yet. Again, the inclusive diphotons and the Z+jet results both have significant sensitivity. |
- | {{:2017:groups:tools:cl_8cpe_zg.png?200|}} $l^+l^- + \gamma$ | + | {{:2017:groups:tools:cl_78wzg_nse.png?200|}} $(l^+l^-)$ or $(l + E_T^{\rm miss}) + \gamma$ |
- | {{:2017:groups:tools:cl_8nse_metg.png?200|}} MET + $\gamma$ | + | {{:2017:groups:tools:cl_8metg_nse.png?200|}} $E_T^{\rm miss} + \gamma$ |
- | {{:2017:groups:tools:cl_8nse_photon.png?200|}} $\gamma\gamma$ | + | {{:2017:groups:tools:cl_78photons_nse.png?200|}} Inclusive and di-photons |
- | + | ||
- | Remember, big caveat on this is that the data is assumed to exactly agree with the SM, which means (given we only really know that these data are //consistent// with the SM) that we are neglected the SM theory uncertainties. | + | |
+ | Note that the sensitivity at low $M_\phi$ and $\Lambda$ is somewhat reduced, especially for the $E_T^{\rm miss} + \gamma$ channel. Presumably something to do with the angular distributions of the decay photons of the $\phi$, but to be studied... | ||
+ | // Remember, big caveat on all this is the standard Contur assumption (at the moment) that the data exactly agree with the SM, which means (given we only really know that these data are //consistent// with the SM) that we are neglecting the SM theory uncertainties. // | ||