12
Rapidity Gaps Between Jets at HERA and the Tevatron Brian Cox Review of results from

Rapidity Gaps Between Jets at HERA and the Tevatron

  • Upload
    chavez

  • View
    40

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Rapidity Gaps Between Jets at HERA and the Tevatron. Brian Cox. Review of results from. A little bit of History. “The frequency of rapidity gaps between jets must be understood before these new physics signatures can be used”. Bjorken Phys. Rev. D 47, 1(1993) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Rapidity Gaps Between Jets at HERA and the Tevatron

Rapidity Gaps Between Jets at HERA and the Tevatron Brian Cox

Review of results from

Page 2: Rapidity Gaps Between Jets at HERA and the Tevatron

A little bit of History

Bjorken Phys. Rev. D 47, 1(1993)“ Rapidity gaps between jets as a new physics signature in very high energy hadron hadron collisions”

BFKL will enhance the rate, but … “a subject beyond the scope of this paper and the competence of its author”

• How big are the strong interaction backgrounds?

• What is the gap survival probability?

“The frequency of rapidity gaps between jets must be understood before these new physics signatures can be used”

Page 3: Rapidity Gaps Between Jets at HERA and the Tevatron

The first gaps between jets analysis from Tevatron and HERA

• ZEUS Collaboration: Phys. Lett. B369 (1996) 55.

• D0 Collaboration: Phys. Rev. Lett. 76 (1996) 734.

• CDF Collaboration: Phys. Rev. Lett. 80 (1998) 1156.

• D0 Collaboration: Phys. Lett. B440 (1998) 189.

Page 4: Rapidity Gaps Between Jets at HERA and the Tevatron

• Overall agreement in gap fraction ~ 1% at Tevatron, ~ 10 % at HERA

• D0 – “BFKL ruled out”

Page 5: Rapidity Gaps Between Jets at HERA and the Tevatron

Is BFKL really ruled out ?B.C. Jeff Forshaw, Leif Lonnblad JHEP 9910 (1999) 023 , R. Enberg, G. Ingelman, L. Motyka Phys. Rev. Lett. B524 (2002) 273

The Mueller – Tang asymptotic approximation in numerator (and Mueller Navelet jet production in denominator) as implemented in HERWIG is not sufficient at Tevatron or HERA energies.

Page 6: Rapidity Gaps Between Jets at HERA and the Tevatron

The new H1 and ZEUS measurementsDemanding ‘no energy’ in a rapidity region is not infra-red safe, and generates numerically important non-global logarithms

G. Oderda and G. Sterman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 3591 (1998)

M. Dasgupta and G. P. Salam JHEP 0203 (2002) 017

R. B. Appleyby and M. H. Seymour JHEP 0212 (2002) 063

jetb

ijetjetfi

ijetT

gapT EE

,

2

, ,

• Gap event defined as :

• Infra red safe definition of gap

• Increases rapidity gap region

• Reduces sensitivity to hadronisation effects

• Reduces sensitivity to non-global logarithms

• Run inclusive KT algorithm

• All objects are included in jets

cutT

gapT EE

Page 7: Rapidity Gaps Between Jets at HERA and the Tevatron

http://jetweb.hep.ucl.ac.uk

Energy Flow and Rapidity Gaps Between Jets in Photoporduction at HERA

Eur. Phys. J C24 (2002) 4, 517-527

Page 8: Rapidity Gaps Between Jets at HERA and the Tevatron

Gap Fractions as a function of

Page 9: Rapidity Gaps Between Jets at HERA and the Tevatron

Cross Sections and Gap Fractions as a function of x

Fractional longitudinal momentum of photon participating in the production of the two highest ET jets

Page 10: Rapidity Gaps Between Jets at HERA and the Tevatron

Gap Fractions as a function of xp

Fractional longitudinal momentum of proton participating in the production of the two highest ET jets

Page 11: Rapidity Gaps Between Jets at HERA and the Tevatron

Summary of the BFKL pomeron model

• CFL fit Tevatron data with s=0.17, gap survival = 0.2

• H1 fit data with s=0.18, gap survival not included in signal

• ZEUS fit data with s=0.17, gap survival from JIMMY

• Potentially large NLO corrections to BFKL not included at HERA, partially included at Tevatron (EIM)

• H1 and ZEUS find that data not sensitive to underlying dynamics

Page 12: Rapidity Gaps Between Jets at HERA and the Tevatron

Should the LHC listen more closely to Bjorken?

invisible

+ missing ET

e.g. ATL-PHYS-2003-006