User Tools

Site Tools


2017:groups:tools:contur_for_light_scalar_particles

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
2017:groups:tools:contur_for_light_scalar_particles [2017/10/01 10:36]
jonathan.butterworth
2017:groups:tools:contur_for_light_scalar_particles [2017/10/11 23:47] (current)
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|}} $E_T^{\rm miss} + \gamma ​(\gamma)$ 
-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-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.+> [[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 this point on their own.
  
 == $M_\phi = 20$ GeV, $\Lambda = 3.5$ TeV == == $M_\phi = 20$ GeV, $\Lambda = 3.5$ TeV ==
  
-> [[http://​www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/​~jmb/​Work/​LH/​NSCPO/​8TeV/​mP_20_f0_3500/​contur-plots/​|Page of plots]]: Another low mass, moderate coupling point. Chosen because for this one, diphoton measurements give the most powerful exclusion (although $\gamma + E_T^{\rm miss}$ still contributes). The [[http://​www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/​~jmb/​Work/​LH/​NSCPO/​8TeV/​mP_20_f0_3500/​contur-plots/​ATLAS_2017_I1591327/​index.html|inclusive diphotons]] would contribute at low $M_{\gamma\gamma}$,​ because the 20 GeV mass of the $\phi$ now sneaks into the measurement at the bottom of the range, but the most sensitive plot in the diphoton category (and thus the one chosen by Contur) is again from the [[http://​www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/​~jmb/​Work/​LH/​NSCPO/​8TeV/​mP_20_f0_3500/​contur-plots/​ATLAS_2014_I1306615/​index.html|Higgs paper]], this time $p_T^{\gamma\gamma}$. This is maybe surprising because the Higgs measurement has a mass window cut at $105 < M^{\gamma\gamma} < 160$ GeV, much higher than $M_\phi$. The contribution to the Higgs fiducial phase space seems to be coming from $q\bar{q} \rightarrow \phi \gamma$ events, where the additional photon pairs with one of the $\phi$ decay products. This interesting but should probably not be taken face value because it is not clear how such a contribution would impact on the continuum in the fits used to extract the $H \rightarrow \gamma\gamma$ cross section.+> [[http://​www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/​~jmb/​Work/​LH/​NSCPO/​8TeV/​mP_20_f0_3500/​contur-plots/​|Page of plots]]: Another low mass, moderate coupling point. Chosen because for this one, diphoton measurements give the most powerful exclusion ​for the 8 TeV data set (although $\gamma + E_T^{\rm miss}$ still contributes, and once 7 TeV are included, the photon measurement would rule this point out too). The [[http://​www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/​~jmb/​Work/​LH/​NSCPO/​8TeV/​mP_20_f0_3500/​contur-plots/​ATLAS_2017_I1591327/​index.html|inclusive diphotons]] would contribute at low $M_{\gamma\gamma}$,​ because the 20 GeV mass of the $\phi$ now sneaks into the measurement at the bottom of the range, but the most sensitive plot in the diphoton category (and thus the one chosen by Contur) is again from the [[http://​www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/​~jmb/​Work/​LH/​NSCPO/​8TeV/​mP_20_f0_3500/​contur-plots/​ATLAS_2014_I1306615/​index.html|Higgs paper]], this time $p_T^{\gamma\gamma}$. This is maybe surprising because the Higgs measurement has a mass window cut at $105 < M^{\gamma\gamma} < 160$ GeV, much higher than $M_\phi$. The contribution to the Higgs fiducial phase space seems to be coming from $q\bar{q} \rightarrow \phi \gamma$ events, where the additional photon pairs with one of the $\phi$ decay products. This interesting but should probably not be taken face value because it is not clear how such a contribution would impact on the continuum in the fits used to extract the $H \rightarrow \gamma\gamma$ cross section.
  
 == $M_\phi = 80$ 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 [[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.+> [[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. And again once the 7 TeV data are included, the inclusive and diphotons cover this point on their own.
  
 == CP-even results== == CP-even results==
  
 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|}} {{:​2017:​groups:​tools:​cl_78cpe.png?​300|}}{{:​2017:​groups:​tools:​contur_78cpe.png?​300|}}
Line 76: Line 74:
 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. 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 
 + 
 +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... 
 + 
 +There is still 95% exclusion even at the highest $\Lambda$ values studied. Would be interesting to see how far it goes. Update - not very far? Here's an 8 TeV run going to higher values. 
 + 
 +{{:​2017:​groups:​tools:​cl_8extended.png?​300|}}{{:​2017:​groups:​tools:​contur_8tev-cpe-extended.png?​300|}}
  
-Note that the sensitivity at low $M_\phi$ and $\Lambda$ is somewhat reduced. Cause to be investigated. The 7 TeV inclusive photon results are needed to fill in the lower left corner. 
  
-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.+// 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. ​//
  
  
2017/groups/tools/contur_for_light_scalar_particles.1506846967.txt.gz · Last modified: 2017/10/01 10:36 by jonathan.butterworth