Simulating Physics at the LHC

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
UCL 30 th March1 LHC Phenomenology Peter Richardson IPPP, Durham University.
Advertisements

MCnet Marie Curie Research Training Network for Monte Carlo event generator –development –validation and tuning Approved for four years from 1 st Jan 2007.
MCnet Marie Curie Research Training Network for Monte Carlo event generator –development –validation and tuning Approved for four years from 1 st Jan 2007.
Monte Carlo Event Generators
1 Top Production Processes at Hadron Colliders By Paul Mellor.
CERN 29 th March1 HERWIG Peter Richardson IPPP, Durham University Herwig++
Monte Carlo event generators for LHC physics Mike Seymour University of Manchester CERN Academic Training Lectures July 7 th – 11 th 2003
Bonn 23 rd Feb1 Simulations of BSM Signals Peter Richardson IPPP, Durham University.
Wine & Cheese Seminar 17 th March1 Recent Developments in Monte Carlo Event Generators Peter Richardson IPPP, Durham University Durham University.
Les Houches 12 th June1 Generator Issues Peter Richardson IPPP, Durham University.
Susy05, Durham 21 st July1 Split SUSY at Colliders Peter Richardson Durham University Work done in collaboration with W. Kilian, T. Plehn and E. Schmidt,
Les Houches 14 th June1 Matching Matrix Elements and Parton Showers Peter Richardson IPPP, Durham University.
Monte Carlo Event Generators
Recent Advances in QCD Event Generators
A Comparison of Three-jet Events in p Collisions to Predictions from a NLO QCD Calculation Sally Seidel QCD’04 July 2004.
Introduction to Hadronic Final State Reconstruction in Collider Experiments Introduction to Hadronic Final State Reconstruction in Collider Experiments.
Parton Showers and Matrix Element Merging in Event Generator- a Mini-Overview Introduction to ME+PS Branching and Sudakov factor (no branching) Matching.
Collider Physics and QCD Phenomenology Mike Seymour (based at CERN) HERWIG Monte Carlo event generator –Current version ~ frozen (bug fixes and minor new.
Jets and QCD resummation Albrecht Kyrieleis. BFKL at NLO Gaps between Jets.
 s determination at LEP Thorsten Wengler University of Manchester DIS’06, Tsukuba, Japan.
Working group C summary Hadronic final states theory Mrinal Dasgupta.
Monte Carlo event generators for LHC physics
The Dipole-Antenna approach to Shower Monte Carlo's W. Giele, HP2 workshop, ETH Zurich, 09/08/06 Introduction Color ordering and Antenna factorization.
Measurement of α s at NNLO in e+e- annihilation Hasko Stenzel, JLU Giessen, DIS2008.
Squarks & Gluinos + Jets: from ttbar to SUSY at the LHC Peter Skands (Fermilab) with T. Plehn (MPI Munich), D. Rainwater (U Rochester), & T. Sjöstrand.
Cambridge 19 th April1 Comparisons between Event Generators and Data Peter Richardson IPPP, Durham University.
GridPP, Durham 5 th July1 PhenoGrid Status Peter Richardson Durham University.
Precision Cross section measurements at LHC (CMS) Some remarks from the Binn workshop André Holzner IPP ETH Zürich DIS 2004 Štrbské Pleso Štrbské Pleso.
LISHEP Rio de Janeiro1 Factorization in diffraction Alice Valkárová Charles University, Prague On behalf of H1 and ZEUS collaborations.
Threshold Resummation for Top- Quark Pair Production at ILC J.P. Ma ITP, CAS, Beijing 2005 年直线对撞机国际研讨会, Tsinghua Univ.
Sheffield Seminar 23 rd November1 Monte Carlos for LHC Physics Peter Richardson IPPP, Durham University Durham University.
12004, TorinoAram Kotzinian Monte Carlo Event Generators The basic lepton-quark scattering processes have well defined cross section formulae within the.
A Comparison Between Different Jet Algorithms for top mass Reconstruction Chris Tevlin University of Manchester (Supervisor - Mike Seymour) Atlas UK top.
DIS Conference, Madison WI, 28 th April 2005Jeff Standage, York University Theoretical Motivations DIS Cross Sections and pQCD The Breit Frame Physics.
Moriond 20 th March1 Herwig++ Peter Richardson IPPP, Durham University S. Gieseke, D. Grellscheid, K. Hamilton, A. Ribon, PR, P. Stephens, M.H. Seymour,
Jet Studies at CDF Anwar Ahmad Bhatti The Rockefeller University CDF Collaboration DIS03 St. Petersburg Russia April 24,2003 Inclusive Jet Cross Section.
October 2011 David Toback, Texas A&M University Research Topics Seminar1 David Toback Texas A&M University For the CDF Collaboration CIPANP, June 2012.
QM 3 rd April1 Collider Phenomenology Peter Richardson IPPP, Durham University.
F Don Lincoln f La Thuile 2002 Don Lincoln Fermilab Tevatron Run I QCD Results Don Lincoln f.
IFIC. 1/15 Why are we interested in the top quark? ● Heaviest known quark (plays an important role in EWSB in many models) ● Important for quantum effects.
Modern Approach to Monte Carlo’s (L1) The role of resolution in Monte Carlo’s (L1) Leading order Monte Carlo’s (L1) Next-to-Leading order Monte Carlo’s.
Next Generation of Parton Shower Models and Validation W. Giele, CTEQ workshop “Physics at the LHC: Early Challenges”, 05/14/07 Introduction A new parton.
Tools08 1 st July1 PDF issues for Monte Carlo generators Peter Richardson IPPP, Durham University.
SuperB 2 nd June1 Experience in migrating the code to a modern framework Peter Richardson IPPP, Durham University Changing HERWIG  Herwig++
YetiSM 28 th March1 Higher Orders in Parton Shower Monte Carlos Peter Richardson IPPP, Durham University Durham University.
A T : novel variable to study low transverse momentum vector boson production at hadron colliders. Rosa María Durán Delgado The University of Manchester.
RBRC & BNL Nuclear Theory
seminar at Academia Sinica
Event Simulation at the LHC
Introduction to Monte Carlo Event Generators
Introduction to pQCD and TMD physics
Overview of IPPP Monte Carlo Tools
New Developments in Herwig++
Peter Richardson IPPP, Durham University
QCD CORRECTIONS TO bb →h h
Simulating New Physics at the LHC
Dr. Terrance Figy Assistant Professor
More Precision, Less Work
Jet shape & jet cross section: from hadrons to nuclei
Current status and future prospects
QCD Radiative Corrections for the LHC
Monte Carlo Simulations
Monte Carlo Simulations
Event Shape Analysis in minimum bias pp collisions in ALICE.
Predicting “Min-Bias” and the “Underlying Event” at the LHC
Single Diffractive Higgs Production at the LHC *
“Min-Bias” and the “Underlying Event” in Run 2 at CDF and the LHC
Introduction to Monte Carlo Event Generators
Introduction to pQCD and TMD physics Lecture 2: perturbative QCD (II)
Peter Loch University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona USA
Presentation transcript:

Simulating Physics at the LHC Peter Richardson IPPP, Durham University Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Outline Introduction Particle Physics Simulations Research in Durham Conclusions Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Introduction The main aim of the LHC is to search for new physics by probing higher energies and shorter distances. When performing calculations of what we’ll see at the LHC can use perturbative calculations due to the property of asymptotic freedom. This allows us to perform accurate calculations of cross sections and distributions. Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May LHC Status We had all hoped to see collisions at the LHC last year. Following the “incident” which caused significant damage to many magnets expect to start in late October 2009. Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Introduction For example the production of the top quark we can calculate the leading (LO) and next-to-leading (NLO) order corrections. In some cases even the next-to-next-to-leading (NNLO) corrections have been calculated. Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Introduction However these calculations are limited by the number of final state particles, currently the state-of-the-art is 2g4 processes at NLO. At the LHC typically each interesting event, for example top pair production, will have several hundred final-state particles. Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Tevatron Top Event Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Simulated LHC Event Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Introduction In order to study the detailed properties of the events we must therefore use a range of techniques to study the physics over a wide range of energy/distance scales fixed-order perturbative calculations where possible; approximate perturbative calculations where fixed-order calculations aren’t practical; non-perturbative models when the couplings are large. Involves calculations from all areas of phenomenology research. Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Introduction Naturally leads to the idea of an event generator, a numerical simulation of particle collisions. In essence these simulations use the Monte Carlo integration technique to perform a high dimensional integral (~3 x number of final-state particles), a Monte Carlo event generator. Extremely useful as the result is a simulated event with the momenta of the final-state particles which can be directly compared with experimental results. Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May A Monte Carlo Event Hard Perturbative scattering: Usually calculated at leading order in QCD, electroweak theory or some BSM model. Modelling of the soft underlying event Multiple perturbative scattering. Perturbative Decays calculated in QCD, EW or some BSM theory. Initial and Final State parton showers resum the large QCD logs. Finally the unstable hadrons are decayed. Non-perturbative modelling of the hadronization process. Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Parton Showers The parton shower is designed to simulate QCD radiation in the: Collinear limit; Soft limit. These are the most important regions of phase space. In these limits cross sections factorize. Department Research Event 29th May

Parton Showers This expression is singular as qg0. What is a parton? (or what is the difference between a collinear pair and a parton) Introduce a resolution criterion, e.g. Combine the virtual corrections and unresolvable emission Resolvable Emission Finite Unresolvable Emission Finite Unitarity: Unresolved + Resolved =1 Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Monte Carlo Procedure Using this approach we can exponentiate the real emission piece. This gives the Sudakov form factor which is the probability of evolving between two scales and emitting no resolvable radiation. Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Numerical Procedure Radioactive Decay Parton Shower Start with an isotope Work out when it decays by generating a random number and solving where t is its lifetime Generate another random number and use the branching ratios to find the decay mode. Generate the decay using the masses of the decay products and phase space. Repeat the process for any unstable decay products. This algorithm is actually used in Monte Carlo event generators to simulate particle decays. Start with a parton at a high virtuality, Q, typical of the hard collision. Work out the scale of the next branching by generating a random number and solving where q is the scale of the next branching If there’s no solution for q bigger than the cut-off stop. Otherwise workout the type of branching. Generate the momenta of the decay products using the splitting functions. Repeat the process for the partons produced in the branching. Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Hadronization We can’t calculate the hadronization process so we use a phenomenological model. The hadronization model is based on an interesting property of the parton shower. First split the gluons into quark-antiquark pairs. Each quark is then uniquely paired with an antiquark in a colour singlet. Department Research Event 29th May

Cluster Hadronization Model The mass spectrum of these colour singlet clusters after gluon splitting is universal. Called colour pre-confinement. Assume these clusters are superpositions of the hadron resonances. Decay according to phase space to hadrons. Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Work in Durham These simulation projects are large, at least for theoretical physics, projects, with the programs typically several hundred thousand lines long. There are three major collaborations in the field. Two of which HERWIG and SHERPA are led from Durham. Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Work in Durham HERWIG Peter Richardson, Mike Seymour, Bryan Webber, Stefan Gieseke David Grellscheid, Keith Hamilton Andrzej Siodmak, Martyn Gigg, Seyi Latunde-Dada, Jonathan Tully, Simon Plaetzer, Manuel Baehr, Luca d’Errico SHERPA Frank Krauss Tanju Gleisberg, Stefan Hoeche, Steffen Schumann, Jan Winter Frank Siegert, Jennifer Archibald currently in Durham previously in Durham + one related postdoc Andy Buckley Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Work in Durham People in Durham are working on a number of different physics projects in this area which are important for the LHC. Topics include: Next-to-leading order simulations; High multiplicity final states; New physics. Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Hard Jet Radiation A lot of work recently improving the approximations including more fixed-order perturbative calculations. Parton Shower (PS) simulations use the soft/collinear approximation: Good for simulating the internal structure of a jet; Can’t produce high pT jets. Matrix Elements (ME) compute the exact result at fixed order: Good for simulating a few high pT jets; Can’t give the structure of a jet. We want to use both in a consistent way. Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Hard Jet Radiation Two broad classes of approach Include the full next-to-leading order calculation Gets the full fixed order result Only useful for low multiplicity final-states, i.e. only one additional jet Use high multiplicity matrix elements Still a leading-order calculation but can be used for high multiplicity final states, i.e. many additional jets. Based on original work by Catani, Krauss, Kuhn and Webber (CKKW). Department Research Event 29th May

Next-to-leading Order Herwig++ Herwig++ NLO MC@NLO Hamilton, PR, Tully JHEP 0810:015,2008 CDF Run I Z pT D0 Run II Z pT Department Research Event 29th May

Leading Order e+e-gjets Herwig++ SHERPA Hamilton, PR, Tully arXiv:0905.3072 Hoeche, Krauss, Schumann, Siegert JHEP 0905:053,2009 Thrust ~ 1 Thrust ~ 1/2 Department Research Event 29th May

Leading Order qqgZ+jets SHERPA Highest pT jet 2nd Highest pT jet Hoeche, Krauss, Schumann, Siegert JHEP 0905:053,2009 Department Research Event 29th May

Matrix Element Calculations For these approaches need to calculate high multiplicity matrix elements. SHPERA uses recursive techniques, rather than Feynman diagrams, and better phase space integration. Calculation of higher multiplicty matrix elements with smaller numerical errors. T.Gleisberg & S.Hoeche, JHEP 0812 (2008) 039 Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May BSM Physics In recent years most of our work in Durham has concentrated on the simulation of Standard Model processes. These will be things we see first and are the backgrounds for any new physics at the LHC. However we are still involved in many studies of new physics for the LHC. Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May BSM Physics Example from recent work by G Moortgat-Pick, J Ellis, F Moortgat, K Rolbiecki, J Smillie, J Tattersall. Looking at triple products of momenta which are sensitive to CP violation using Herwig++ and analytic calculations Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May BSM Physics Look at the decay e- near e- far q*L e*R Z* g* q e- near e+ far e+ near e+ far Herwig++ compared to hep-ph/0507170 Smillie and Webber Gigg, Richardson Eur.Phys.J.C51:989-1008,2007 Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Black Holes Original generator C.M. Harris, PR, B.R. Webber JHEP 0308:033,2003. Subsequent experimental analysis C.M. Harris, M.J. Palmer, M.A. Parker, PR, A. Sabetfakhri, B.R. Webber JHEP 0505:053,2005 Department Research Event 29th May

Department Research Event 29th May Conclusions Simulations in particle physics are important for all experimental analysis. This is an area where the IPPP now plays the world leading role. We are working on simulations of many things which are important both for early LHC data and later analyses. This work will enable the IPPP to play in major role in the LHC programme. Department Research Event 29th May