1 / 18

POWHEG Adaptation of the Baur Zγ Generator

POWHEG Adaptation of the Baur Zγ Generator. Lindsey Gray University of Wisconsin at Madison Weekly Meeting 3 June, 2009. Action Items. Show plots of pythia based CMSSW analysis, scaled by appropriate factors. Resurrect and show plots from RCT Calibration Routines

gil-brady
Download Presentation

POWHEG Adaptation of the Baur Zγ Generator

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. POWHEG Adaptation of the Baur Zγ Generator Lindsey Gray University of Wisconsin at Madison Weekly Meeting 3 June, 2009

  2. Action Items • Show plots of pythia based CMSSW analysis, scaled by appropriate factors. • Resurrect and show plots from RCT Calibration Routines • Status of POWHEG adaptation of Baur’s MC Generator • Draft for Multi-boson group talk in 2 weeks! Lindsey Gray, UW Madison

  3. Getting Back to Zγ Analysis • Original analysis had a flaw in normalization • Calculate event yield was actually too small! • To show: • Results of using production Zγ sample (Pythia 6) • Use same set of fiducial, photon id and kinematics cuts, but with proper normalization • Initial results from using Mike’s multivariate photon id Lindsey Gray, UW Madison

  4. Summary of Signal & Background Signal Background 200pb-1 Lindsey Gray, UW Madison

  5. Output of TMVA-based Photon ID • Fisher discriminant works properly • Good separation between signal and background • Small cross section of Zγ signal implies tight cut on Fisher output • Fisher > .2 Lindsey Gray, UW Madison

  6. Draft of Multi-boson talk 2 weeks from now

  7. Outline • Overview of POWHEG • Motivation & Definition • Current Results of Adapting Baur’s MC • Development Strategy & Status • Born Level Results & Comparison to Baur’s MC • Including Anomalous Couplings • Conclusions & Next Steps Lindsey Gray, UW Madison

  8. Shower MCs & NLO Generators Shower Monte Carlo NLO MC Generator Take 2 -> n process Determine virtual and collinear corrections Divergent! Calculate full 2 -> n+1 cross section Divergent! Sum of all contributions is finite! Accurate normalizations but bad shapes at low pT • Take 2 -> n process and determine probability for no QCD radiation • Sudakov form factor • Collinear factorization • Reconstruct n+1 body process in collinear limit • Accept or reject radiation • Iterate until emission energy is below some threshold • Normalizations wrong, bad shapes at high pT Lindsey Gray, UW Madison

  9. Combining Shower MC with NLO • It is natural to want to combine NLO calculations with Shower MCs (SMC)! • However there are issues: • Double counting • Simply interfacing an NLO generator directly to a SMC will cause the SMC to generate events the NLO generator has already produced! • Matching NLO matrix elements to Shower MC emissions • Make sure QCD emission has correct probability in hard, soft and collinear regimes! • Many solutions exist: • MC@NLO, POWHEG, CKKW, MLM Lindsey Gray, UW Madison

  10. The POWHEG Method • POsitive Weight Hardest Event Generator • One of the many solutions to interfacing a NLO event generator with a shower monte carlo. • Independent of the Shower Monte Carlo used for hadronization • Hence independent of CMSSW • Do not allow SMC to generate radiation harder than the radiation from the POWHEG event. • As the name says, it generates events with all positive weights. • Produce unweighted events through well established methods. Lindsey Gray, UW Madison

  11. Applying POWHEG to Baur’s MC • To implement any process using the POWHEG method you need: • The Born level phase space • A list of Born and Real subprocesses • Born squared amplitude • Real squared amplitude • Finite part of the virtual amplitude contribution • All of these are available in Baur’s Zγ cross section calculation (though not explicitly labeled!) • Plan to extract and adapt necessary pieces from Baur’s code into existing POWHEG W/Z production code Lindsey Gray, UW Madison

  12. What’s in Baur’s MC • Baur’s MC really consists of three MCs where the results of each are summed • 1 MC for pp -> l+l-γ process to generate Born, finite virtual and collinear pieces • Soft/Collinear IR divergence is regulated by cutoffs • 1 MC for pp -> l+l-γ+jet process • “Real” process, regulated by the same cutoffs • 1 MC for pp -> l+l-jet+γ • Contribution from Z+jet events where the jet brems • Can be safely ignored if ΔRγ,jet cut is applied • 1% Effect for ΔR > .7 confirmed with Dr. Baur Lindsey Gray, UW Madison

  13. What’s Different in POWHEG • Baur’s cutoff regulator is replaced with Catani-Seymour or FKS regulator • Physical observables must independent of the regulator chosen • Collinear and Real contributions will change, total and differential cross sections should be unaffected • Collinear contribution ~ to Born level result • Just “paste” Born level Zγ result into POWHEG’s collinear contribution calculation • Baur’s code uses narrow width approximation, POWHEG code has finite Z width Lindsey Gray, UW Madison

  14. Current Status of Development • All necessary portions of Baur’s NLO calculation have been extracted • Testing is in progress: • Born matrix element result is fully tested • 2.5% normalization difference relative to Baur LO • Shapes match • Results to be shown • Collinear & Virtual corrections implemented • Currently debugging & testing • Real matrix element result is implemented • Currently debugging & testing Lindsey Gray, UW Madison

  15. Shape Comparison: Diboson Mass & Lepton PT • All plots are area normalized. • 2.5% normalization difference • All Born level shapes agree! • With the exception of the diboson mass. • Known effect since Baur’s code uses narrow width approx. and POWHEG code has finite Z width. • Using narrow width approx. in POWHEG code doesn’t fix 2.5% normalization difference. Baur POWHEG Lindsey Gray, UW Madison

  16. Shape Comparison:Photon PT, Lepton η & Photon η Baur POWHEG Lindsey Gray, UW Madison

  17. Shape Comparison:Photon PT + Anomalous Coupling • ACs are automatically included in the routines from Baur’s code. • Scaling is the same between Baur MC and POWHEG. Lindsey Gray, UW Madison

  18. Conclusions and Next Steps • All of the necessary components for NLO Zγ cross section calculation are in place in POWHEG • What remains now is extensive testing, debugging and comparison to Baur’s NLO code • Determine source of 2.5% normalization difference • Once NLO calculation is fully ported and tested • Test event generation • Compare unweighted event kinematics distributions to NLO differential cross sections • Run trials interfacing POWHEG lhe-event file to Pythia, Herwig, et al. and cross check results. Lindsey Gray, UW Madison

More Related