WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 1
Systematic studies on mwD. BOUMEDIENE – P. PEREZ – E. LANCON
CEA/ Saclay
O. BUCHMÜLLER
1- Reminder (cone, P cut, PF cut)
2- P Flow cut analysis
3- Cone analysis
4- No typ6 objects analysis
5- Charged only analysis
6- Mjet=0 analysis
7- Conclusion
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 2
ReminderReminder Leukerbad:
• Pcut analysis (cutting on all Eflow objects) is unstable for all channels
• The instability is due to some neutral objects (ECAL residuals : typ6 Eflow objects )
• the analysis is stable either :
• if typ6 objects are not considered at all,
• or if no cut is applied on typ6 objects
• However the two analyses lead to incompatible mw measurements
Pisa / W meeting 06-07-01:
• Particle Flow based cut analysis is not stable in the 4q channel (it motivated the test of Pcut on 4q and lqq)
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 3
AimAim
mw measurement stability is tested for the following algorithms
• Pcut (see Leukerbad meeting)
• PF cut (4q+lqq)
• Cone (4q+lqq)
Absolute ALEPH mw measurement scale is tested with
• Charged only (4q+lqq)
• Typ6 suppression (updated)
• Mjet=0 (4q+lqq) Mw is measured 23 times (4 channels)
New today
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 4
TechniquesTechniques 4q channels: 3D fit
lqq channels:
• The lepton is not used (because not concerned by the effect): 2D fit
• All the channels are used (except ll)
Parametrisations/jet corrections are systematically recomputed
Correlations are evaluated at 2 energies (4q+lqq merged)
shifts on mw derived from observed errors.
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 5
Pflow Cut AnalysisPflow Cut Analysis PF in 4q channel is given by Thomas's code
An equivalent distribution is defined in the 3 lqq channels
P Flow cut
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 6
Pflow cut analysis
Pflow cut analysis
tendency: slope is 2.0 far from 0 (jetset)
discrepancy wrt flat: 1.6
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 7
Pflow cut analysis: no cut on typ6 obj.
Pflow cut analysis: no cut on typ6 obj.
tendency: 1.2 from slope=0
discrepancy wrt flat: 0.4
tendency: 2.0 1.2
discrepancy wrt flat:
1.6
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 8
PFcut SummaryPFcut Summary• PF cut analysis (cutting on all objects) is unstable (2.0 )
• It is difficult to use it to measure CR
• The size of the effect is compatible with what was observed with the P cut.
-82 51 MeV/c2 (excluding [0.1,0.9], lqq+4q)
• The physical source of the problem in Pcut/Pfcut analyses comes from the same source: cutting on typ6 objects
• PF cut analysis without cutting on typ6 objects is stable
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 9
• Hugo’s cone Algorithm is used for the reconstruction (http://alephwww.cern.ch/~ruizh/aleph-only/cones/cones.html)
• jet parametrisations are recomputed
• Jet energy corrections are done ( Patrice talk)
• All energies, all channels (except ll) are used
• Correlations between analyses are computed with
2 x 200k evt (@ 2 energies)
The difference 4q / lqq and energy dependence are neglected
the cone analysisthe cone analysis
Rcone 0.6 0.75 1.0 1.25 2.0
(%) 73 78 83 90 95
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 10
Parametrisation (Rc=0.6)
Parametrisation (Rc=0.6)
b: angular resolutio
n
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 11
Parametrisation (Rc=2.0)
Parametrisation (Rc=2.0)
b: angular resolutio
n
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 12
mw versus RCmw versus RC
tendency: 2.6 far from expectations (jetset)
discrepancy wrt flat: 2.4
Durham analysis (RC=3.0) taken as
reference
better probability for the slope
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 13
4q/lqq contributions4q/lqq contributions
Probability of a linear behavior (with a slope) increases when combining 4q and lqq channels
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 14
mw versus s (Rc=0.75)
mw versus s (Rc=0.75)
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 15
Cone without typ6 objects
Cone without typ6 objects
tendency: FLAT (<1
discrepancy wrt flat: (<1
‘Cutting’ on typ6 objects caused the
instability
RC=2.0 taken as reference
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 16
Cone SummaryCone Summary• Cone analysis (with all measured energy) is unstable (2.6 ) as expected
• It cannot be used to measure CR
• The problem is not due to 1 energy only
• The effect is similar to what was observed with the P cut and PF cut analyses :
-85 31 MeV/c2 (Rc=0.6, lqq+4q)
• The physical source of the problem is the same
• Cone analysis without typ6 is stable
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 17
Standard Durham analysis without Typ6 objects
Standard Durham analysis without Typ6 objects
• All type6 (~5% energy) objects are removed from the jets.
• Statistical sensitivity loss is < 1% in both lqq and 4q channels
• Correlation with standard analysis =92%
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 18
Effect of Typ6 objects suppression
Effect of Typ6 objects suppression
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 19
Typ6 Suppression Summary
Typ6 Suppression Summary• mw measured without typ6 objects is
shifted wrt standard analysis by:
-112 20 MeV/c2
• The effect is compatible to what was observed with the P cut / PF cut / cone analyses
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 20
Charged only analysis
Charged only analysis
• we can test an analysis using only charged tracks. Such an analysis is reliable (all distributions for charged are in agreement between DATA/MC)
• but we expect a big loss of sensitivity.
Tested analysis: Charged objects only are used
correlation with std analysis: = 31 %
Sensitivity loss: ~ %
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 21
Charged only analysisCharged only analysis
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 22
Charged Only SummaryCharged Only Summary• mw measured with charged objects only is shifted wrt standard analysis by:
-120 65 MeV/c2
• The effect is compatible to what was observed with the P cut / PF cut / cone / pre typ 6 analyses
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 23
• Jet masses are biased by a bad simulation of multiplicities in particular for typ6 objects.
• It is known that the bias propagates to mw
• A measurement with a fixed Mjet should be insensitive to a bias
Tested analysis:
We fix Ejet = Pjet
( same jet mass in MC and DATA)
Nothing is removed, we just forget the jet mass
correlation with std analysis: = 74 %
Sensitivity loss: qlqq %
mjet=0 analysis
mjet=0 analysis
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 24
mjet = 0 analysis
mjet = 0 analysis
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 25
mjet=0 Summary
mjet=0 Summary
• mw measured with mjet=0 is shifted wrt standard analysis (2D for lqq) by:
-79 31 MeV/c2
• The effect is compatible with what was observed with
P cut / PF cut / cone / pre typ 6 / charged only analyses
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 26
CONE (Rc=0.6) - 85 31 (2.7
Pflow - 82 51 (1.6
(exclud. [0.1,0.9])
Pcut (cut 2GeV) -125 40 (3.1) 3.2
Pre TYP6 -112 20 (5.6
Charged only -120 65 (1.8
Mjet=0 - 79 31 (2.5
SummarySummaryAnalysis mw(MeV/c2) slope slope no typ6
we have compelling evidences that the aleph w mass is overestimated by 50-100 MeV/c2
WW meeting 28/11/01 D. BOUMEDIENE 27
ConclusionConclusion
We have compelling evidences that the aleph w mass is overestimated by 50-100 MeV/c2
We have developed low correlated analyses which are stable in the lqq channels (Minimum requirement for 4q Color
Reconnection sensitive analysis)
Those analyses will now be used to study Color Reconnection effect in the 4q channel
mw and width analysis
The code and ntuples are publicly available on
Castor for all energies and all MC