1 D *+ production Alexandr Kozlinskiy Thomas Bauer Vanya Belyaev 25.06.2010.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
 (1385) ANALYSIS STATUS Enrico Fragiacomo, Massimo Venaruzzo INFN and University Trieste Resonances meeting – CERN – 04/03/2011.
Advertisements

Measuring the bb cross- section using B  D o X   decays Liming Zhang & Sheldon Stone Syracuse University.
Effect of b-tagging Scale Factors on M bb invariant mass distribution Ricardo Gonçalo.
Fermilab, June 26 th 2001 Thoughts on the fitting procedure for the  c + lifetime with the        channel Gianluigi Boca.
Measurement of the absolute BR(K  +  -  + ) : an update Patrizia de Simone KLOE Kaon meeting – 21 May 2009.
June 6 th, 2011 N. Cartiglia 1 “Measurement of the pp inelastic cross section using pile-up events with the CMS detector” How to use pile-up.
Measuring the bb cross- section using B  D o X   decays Liming Zhang & Sheldon Stone Syracuse University.
1 N. Davidson E/p single hadron energy scale check with minimum bias events Jet Note 8 Meeting 15 th May 2007.
1 Beam e ’s from antineutrinos using the pME and LE beams David Jaffe, Pedro Ochoa December 8 th 2006  Part 1: Reminder and update  Part 2: Change in.
Study of the semileptonic decays at 4170 MeV Koloina Randrianarivony Marina Artuso (Syracuse University)
A Method to measure  + /   detection efficiency asymmetry at LHCb Liming Zhang 08/15/07.
1 N. Davidson Calibration with low energy single pions Tau Working Group Meeting 23 rd July 2007.
Study of e + e  collisions with a hard initial state photon at BaBar Michel Davier (LAL-Orsay) for the BaBar collaboration TM.
Analysis work by: Rachid Ayad Sheldon Stone Jianchun Wang CBX note available: /homes/cleo/sls/ds4pi.ps Status of B  D  (4  )   analysis Jianchun.
Measurement of the Branching fraction B( B  D* l ) C. Borean, G. Della Ricca G. De Nardo, D. Monorchio M. Rotondo Riunione Gruppo I – Napoli 19 Dicembre.
Xiaoyan LinQuark Matter 2006, Shanghai, Nov , Study B and D Contributions to Non- photonic Electrons via Azimuthal Correlations between Non-
Resonances in decay for 400fb -1 DC Meeting April 10th, 2006 J.Brodzicka, H.Palka INP Kraków J.Brodzicka, H.Palka INP Kraków B +  D 0 D 0 K + B +  D.
Analysis Meeting vol Shun University.
 Candidate events are selected by reconstructing a D, called a tag, in several hadronic modes  Then we reconstruct the semileptonic decay in the system.
N  for 2012 Zhiyong Wang May, 12,2015 Charmonium group meeting 1.
Walid DRIDI, CEA/Saclay n_TOF Collaboration Meeting, Paris December 4-5, 2006 DAPNIA Neutron capture cross section of 234 U Walid DRIDI CEA/Saclay for.
Kalanand Mishra April 27, Branching Ratio Measurements of Decays D 0  π - π + π 0, D 0  K - K + π 0 Relative to D 0  K - π + π 0 Giampiero Mancinelli,
E. De LuciaNeutral and Charged Kaon Meeting – 7 May 2007 Updates on BR(K +  π + π 0 ) E. De Lucia.
K charged meeting 10/11/03 K tracking efficiency & geometrical acceptance :  K (p K,  K )  We use the tag in the handle emisphere to have in the signal.
Possibility of tan  measurement with in CMS Majid Hashemi CERN, CMS IPM,Tehran,Iran QCD and Hadronic Interactions, March 2005, La Thuile, Italy.
Track extrapolation to TOF with Kalman filter F. Pierella for the TOF-Offline Group INFN & Bologna University PPR Meeting, January 2003.
 0  5  Outline Event selection & analysis Background rejection Efficiencies Mass spectrum Comparison data-MC Branching ratio evaluation Systematics.
Optimization of  exclusion cut for the  + and  (1520) analysis Takashi Nakano Based on Draft version of Technical Note 42.
On quasi-two-body components of (for 250fb -1 ) (for 250fb -1 ) J.Brodzicka, H.Palka INP Krakow DC Meeting May 16, 2005 B +  D 0 D 0 K + B +  D 0 D 0.
1 Semileptonic physics in FOCUS D  K  0 l form factor measurement –Motivation –Method and Signals D   l form factor measurement –Motivation –Signals.
A bin-free Extended Maximum Likelihood Fit + Feldman-Cousins error analysis Peter Litchfield  A bin free Extended Maximum Likelihood method of fitting.
1 Warsaw Group May 2015 Search for CPV in three-bodies charm baryon decays Outline Selections Mass distributions and reconstructed numbers of candidates.
Mark Dorman UCL/RAL MINOS Collaboration Meeting Fermilab, Oct. 05 Data/MC Comparisons and Estimating the ND Flux with QE Events ● Update on QE event selection.
JPS 2003 in Sendai Measurement of spectral function in the decay 1. Motivation ~ Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment ~ 2. Event selection 3. mass.
D 0 reconstruction: 15 AGeV – 25 AGeV – 35 AGeV M.Deveaux, C.Dritsa, F.Rami IPHC Strasbourg / GSI Darmstadt Outline Motivation Simulation Tools Results.
Charged Particle Multiplicity, Michele Rosin U. WisconsinQCD Meeting May 13, M. Rosin, D. Kçira, and A. Savin University of Wisconsin L. Shcheglova.
4/12/05 -Xiaojian Zhang, 1 UIUC paper review Introduction to Bc Event selection The blind analysis The final result The systematic error.
A High Statistics Study of the Decay M. Fujikawa for the Belle Collaboration Outline 1.Introduction 2.Experiment Belle detector 3.Analysis Event selection.
Update on Diffractive Dijets Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham 12/07/2013.
06/2006I.Larin PrimEx Collaboration meeting  0 analysis.
1 EMCAL Reconstruction in Pass pp 900 GeV 29/03/2010 Gustavo Conesa Balbastre.
Kalanand Mishra June 29, Branching Ratio Measurements of Decays D 0  π - π + π 0, D 0  K - K + π 0 Relative to D 0  K - π + π 0 Giampiero Mancinelli,
Kalanand Mishra February 23, Branching Ratio Measurements of Decays D 0  π - π + π 0, D 0  K - K + π 0 Relative to D 0  K - π + π 0 decay Giampiero.
Elliptic flow of D mesons Francesco Prino for the D2H physics analysis group PWG3, April 12 th 2010.
Belle General meeting Measurement of spectral function in the decay 1. Motivation 2. Event selection 3. mass spectrum (unfolding) 4. Evaluation.
Particle identification by energy loss measurement in the NA61 (SHINE) experiment Magdalena Posiadala University of Warsaw.
Low Mass Vector Mesons Nuclear Modification Factors in d+Au 200GeV Lei Guo Los Alamos National Laboratory PHENIX Collaboration.
Paolo Massarotti Kaon meeting March 2007  ±  X    X  Time measurement use neutral vertex only in order to obtain a completely independent.
The Univ. of Tokyo Dept. of Physics 1 New MT method to remove SUSY contaminations CSC Note 1&2 : 27 Aug 2007 Ginga Akimoto, Y. Kataoka, S. Asai The University.
M. Martemianov, ITEP, October 2003 Analysis of ratio BR(K     0 )/BR(K    ) M. Martemianov V. Kulikov Motivation Selection and cuts Trigger efficiency.
Charm Mixing and D Dalitz analysis at BESIII SUN Shengsen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing (for BESIII Collaboration) 37 th International Conference.
Charm Form Factors from from B -Factories A. Oyanguren BaBar Collaboration (IFIC –U. Valencia)
I'm concerned that the OS requirement for the signal is inefficient as the charge of the TeV scale leptons can be easily mis-assigned. As a result we do.
LNF 12/12/06 1 F.Ambrosino-T. Capussela-F.Perfetto Update on        Dalitz plot slope Where we started from A big surprise Systematic checks.
Upsilon production and μ-tagged jets in DØ Horst D. Wahl Florida State University (DØ collaboration) 29 April 2005 DIS April to 1 May 2005 Madison.
INFN - PadovaBeauty Measurements in pp with the Central Detector 1 Beauty Measurements in p-p with the Central Detector F. Antinori, C. Bombonati, A. Dainese,
Referee Report on Open charm production results for summer conferences, 2010 Peter Clarke Marcel Merk “Observations” and “Comments” The referees thank.
analisys: Systematics checks
p0 life time analysis: general method, updates and preliminary result
° status report analysis details: overview; “where we are”; plans: before finalizing result.. I.Larin 02/13/2009.
Quarkonium production in ALICE
Reddy Pratap Gandrajula (University of Iowa) on behalf of CMS
EMCal Recalibration Check
Study of e+e- pp process using initial state radiation with BaBar
Problems with the Run4 Preliminary Phi->KK Analysis
Study of e+e collisions with a hard initial state photon at BaBar
Dilepton Mass. Progress report.
Update of
10 TeV BJ/K at CMS Zheng Wang Apr
° status report analysis details: overview; “where we are”; plans: before finalizing result.. I.Larin 02/13/2009.
Presentation transcript:

1 D *+ production Alexandr Kozlinskiy Thomas Bauer Vanya Belyaev

2 Outline Introduction Selections Yield extraction Cuts optimization procedure Efficiencies (reconstruction, PID, generator) Trigger efficiencies Comparison of MC and Data Yields Systematics Summary

Introduction 3 Study of tagged D *+ → (D 0 → μμ)π + needs: understanding of charm production cross section D * polarization Study of D *+ → (D 0 → K – π + )π + : production cross section: versus P t and rapidity up to zero P t D * polarization additional measurements and crosschecks: D 0 life time tracking efficiencies, PID efficiencies, etc. Data sets used: Minimum bias TCKx51710 (magnet up and down) ‘Good’ TCKx51710 (charm stream) ‘Good’ TCKx81710 (charm stream) Note: Cuts optimization made on minimum bias magnet down data All mass plots and yields are made using ‘good’ TCKx51710 data MC comparison made with all ‘good’ data Systematics were studied using minimum bias data

Cuts were optimized on minimum bias magnet down data (133M events) to have minimum σS/S (the most precise yield measurement), where S is the yield of D * ’s. Following cuts were applied beforehand (no optimization): D 0 mass window: 100 MeV |M(D * ) – M(D 0 ) – 145.5| < 2.5 MeV (σΔM = 0.75 MeV) No PID were used during cuts optimization. Optimized cuts: D 0 daughters IP χ 2 > 9 (D 0 daughters do not point to primary vertex) D 0 vertex χ 2 < 9 D 0 life time fit χ 2 < 9 (pointing to primary vertex) D 0 life time > 90 μm (background has “0” life time) cos(θ π ) in D 0 rest frame < 0.9 (signal has flat distribution) D * vertex χ 2 < 16 The optimal values are stable with respect to PID: K from D 0 : Δ LL (K) – Δ LL (π) > 0 π from D 0 : Δ LL (π) – Δ LL (K) > 0 Selections 4 cos(θ π ) in D 0 rest frame M(D * ) – M(D 0 )

D 0 mass distribution 5 D 0 mass distribution shows the total number of D 0 ’s in the selected sample, but it still contains wrong combination of soft pion and D 0. The methods to subtract this wrong combination are explained on next slides. N = 1476 ± 43 Mean = (1863 ± 0.3) MeV σ = (9.3 ± 0.3) MeV

6 Yield of D * ’s (method 1) Points in the plots are number of D 0 ‘s within corresponding ΔM slice. The distribution is fitted with Gaussian + (ΔM – 139.6) 0.5. N = 1149 ± 46 Mean = MeV σ = (0.78 ± 0.03) MeV N(D 0 )

The following procedure to get number of D * ’s were used as second method: Fit number of D 0 ’s in signal region Fit number of D 0 ’s in sidebands of delta mass Calculate number of background D 0 ’s in signal region from sidebands using ratio: ratio = 1.2 Calculate number of true D * ’s: N = N signal – ratio · N bg = 1185 ± 51 7 M(D * ) – M(D 0 ) sideband signal region M(Kπ) fit in signal region M(Kπ) fit in sidebands N = 1476 ± 43 σ = 9.3 ± 0.3 N = 245 ± 2 σ = 7.7 ± 0.8 Yield of D * ’s (method 2)

8 Yield of D * ’s (method 3 – default) One can also directly subtract sideband histogram (from previous slide) from signal histogram (taking into account errors in bins and ratio factor). After subtraction the number of D * ’s can be extracted from fit resulted histogram. The first method gives the most precise value of D * ’s but cat be used only for high statistics points (not applicable for fitting in bins of P t and rapidity). All three methods give similar values within ±20 events which can be thought of as systematic error of 1.7% for the yield extraction method. N = 1168 ± 52 σ = 9.5 ± 0.4 N bg,3σ = 1 ± 16 Method 1N = 1149 ± 46 Method 2N = 1185 ± 51 Method 3N = 1168 ± 52

To optimize one particular cut the value of that cut was varied with all other cuts fixed on their optimal values (iterative process). The values of cuts were chosen to be close to minimum of the σS/S dependency (see plots below). Ranges of optimal values are wide in most cases. The only cut that change it’s optimal value with PID is D 0 vertex χ 2 (from 4 to 9). D * vertex χ 2 does not have minimum but still cut on 16. Optimization procedure D 0 daughters IP χ 2 > 9D 0 vertex χ 2 < 9D 0 life time fit χ 2 < 9 D 0 life time > 90 μmcos(θ π ) < 0.9D * vertex χ 2 < 16 9

Reconstruction efficiencies, no PID Efficiency versus P t Efficiency versus rapidity Reconstruction efficiency was calculated using 2.5M magnet up and 2.5M magnet down MC events without use of PID cuts. 10

PID Efficiencies, using Andrew Powell (AP) tables 11 The PID efficiencies calculated using tables provided by Andrew Powell. This tables contain efficiencies for identifying kaon as kaon and pion as pion in the specified bin of P t and Eta. By reweighting every event in MC sample that passed all selections with weigh (ε K · ε π ) –1, where ε K is efficiency from the table for kaon from D 0 and ε π is efficiency for pion from D 0, one can do back transformation of PID cut and extract efficiency. The same procedure can be done using data sample (the result will be the same, this is because for specific P t and rapidity of D * the kinematic for kaon and pion for D 0 is well described in MC).

12 Comparison of PID Efficiencies (directly from Data and MC and using AP tables) The PID efficiency can be directly extracted in MC and Data by comparing the yield of D * ’s with and without use of PID cuts. The PID efficiency versus P t looks quite different (can be due to wide bins in P t in AP tables). Biggest difference in bins with smallest yields. Efficiency versus rapidity looks good. The overall systematic on PID can be estimated to be less then 5% on average (need to be investigated in more details). PID efficiency versus P t PID efficiency versus rapidity

Generator level efficiencies Generator level efficiencies are calculated by looking at how many signal events pass ‘DaughtersInLHCb’ cut after Gauss generation step. Current table is done using 10K magnet down and 10K magnet up generated events. redo for 1M magnet up and down to reduce errors. 13

14 Total efficiency Total efficiency includes reconstruction efficiency, PID efficiency and generator efficiency.

15 Trigger efficiencies TCKx51710TCKx81710 For TCKx51710 the efficiency for MicroBias* triggers on selected events is 100% For TCKx81710 the MicroBias*RateLimited trigger is limited to 100 Hz MicroBias*RateLimited triggers can increase statistic by factor 2-3 MicroBias*RateLimited, DiHadron and SingleHadron triggers – factor 5-6 MicroBias*RateLimited and MicroBias* (pre- and post-scaled by 10000?) triggers can be used to extract real MicroBias* rate. ~85%

D 0 daughters IP χ 2 D 0 vertex χ 2 D 0 life time fit χ 2 D 0 life timecos(θ π ) in D 0 rest frameD * vertex χ 2 Data and MC comparison Following plots are comparison of different distributions (that are used in selections) for Data and MC. Every point in the plots is the number of D * ’s obtained with method 3 (background subtracted distributions). In general the MC describes Data on a good level, except D 0 life time χ 2 (looks wider). 16

IP distribution, D from B D 0 IP (logarithmic scale)D 0 life time χ 2 (equivalent to D 0 IP χ 2 ) The distribution of D 0 IP in Data shifted a bit to the right when compared to MC. It is possible that the D * sample is contaminated by D from B. Those D’s should be visible on IP distribution as a bump on right side (nothing is seen in current sample). The D 0 life time χ 2 distribution is wider then in MC and has strange behavior around 7-9 (goes down). Need to study more wide range (difficult due to cut in stripping – will be removed, and due to low statistic). 17

D * production versus P t 18 Method 3 was used to get number of D * ’s for every P t slice. Both distribution (for Data and MC) are normalized to one. no efficiency correction

19 D * production versus rapidity Method 3 was used to get number of D * ’s for every rapidity slice. Both distribution (for Data and MC) are normalized to one. no efficiency correction

20 Raw yields 2 < P t < < y < < P t < < y < < P t < < y < 3.5 The raw yield is extracted by fitting with method 3 in every bin of Pt and rapidity with fixed width and mean of Gaussian (N signal and N background are free parameters). The width and mean are fixed on corresponding values obtained from the fit of all events.

21 Yields Yield corrected for: reconstruction efficiency PID efficiency generator efficiency

22 Systematics (using minimum bias data) The cuts systematics are calculated by releasing them one by one and comparing the corrected by reconstruction efficiency (obtained from MC) raw yields. The difference will give estimate of systematic error for corresponding cut. D 0 daughters IP χ 2 : > 9 → > 4: → : 2.2% D 0 vertex χ 2 : < 9 → < 25: → : 2.5% D 0 life time fit χ 2 : < 9 → < 25: → : 3.9% : < 9 → < 16: → : 2.6% increase in the yield due to D from B? release this cut to reduce systematic (may be this is already estimate for D from B) will allow to study D from B contribution D 0 life time: > 90 → > 60 μm: → : 0.7% cos(θ π ) in D 0 rest frame: < 0.9 → < 1.0: → : 0.9% D * vertex χ 2 : < 16 → < 25: → : 1.2% release or remove cut (no minimum → may be not really needed?) The total selections systematic is 5.4% (excluding PID systematic). Method systematic: 1.7% PID systematic: less then 5% (need to be investigated in more details)

23 Yields (TCKx TCKx81710)

24 Summary All efficiencies are taken into account Redo generator efficiencies with more events The data and MC agree quite well Still have to study in details D 0 life time χ 2 distribution release or remove cut D from B The total systematic for selections is 5.4%, PID – less then 5%, method – 1.7% Calculate trigger efficiencies and include TCKx81710 in analysis increase in statistic: factor 5-6 Try extracting D * polarization in P t bins