Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS MC & Tuning at CMS Tevatron to LHC: UE & MB Rick Field University of Florida Outline of Talk UE&MB@CMS The “underlying event” in jet production at CDF. The “underlying event” in lepton-pair production at CDF. CERN December 16. 2008 Look at <pT> versus Nchg in “min-bias” and lepton-pair production at CDF. Rick Field Craig Group Deepak Kar CDF Run 2 CMS at the LHC MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Tune A energy dependence! PYTHIA 6.2 Tunes All use LO as with L = 192 MeV! Parameter Tune AW Tune DW Tune D6 PDF CTEQ5L CTEQ6L MSTP(81) 1 MSTP(82) 4 PARP(82) 2.0 GeV 1.9 GeV 1.8 GeV PARP(83) 0.5 PARP(84) 0.4 PARP(85) 0.9 1.0 PARP(86) 0.95 PARP(89) 1.8 TeV PARP(90) 0.25 PARP(62) 1.25 PARP(64) 0.2 PARP(67) 4.0 2.5 MSTP(91) PARP(91) 2.1 PARP(93) 15.0 UE Parameters Uses CTEQ6L Tune A energy dependence! ISR Parameter Intrinsic KT MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
ATLAS energy dependence! PYTHIA 6.2 Tunes All use LO as with L = 192 MeV! Parameter Tune DWT Tune D6T ATLAS PDF CTEQ5L CTEQ6L MSTP(81) 1 MSTP(82) 4 PARP(82) 1.9409 GeV 1.8387 GeV 1.8 GeV PARP(83) 0.5 PARP(84) 0.4 PARP(85) 1.0 0.33 PARP(86) 0.66 PARP(89) 1.96 TeV 1.0 TeV PARP(90) 0.16 PARP(62) 1.25 PARP(64) 0.2 PARP(67) 2.5 MSTP(91) PARP(91) 2.1 PARP(93) 15.0 5.0 UE Parameters ATLAS energy dependence! ISR Parameter Intrinsic KT MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
These are “old” PYTHIA 6.2 tunes! ATLAS energy dependence! See the talk by Hendrik Hoeth for “new” tunes! All use LO as with L = 192 MeV! Parameter Tune DWT Tune D6T ATLAS PDF CTEQ5L CTEQ6L MSTP(81) 1 MSTP(82) 4 PARP(82) 1.9409 GeV 1.8387 GeV 1.8 GeV PARP(83) 0.5 PARP(84) 0.4 PARP(85) 1.0 0.33 PARP(86) 0.66 PARP(89) 1.96 TeV 1.0 TeV PARP(90) 0.16 PARP(62) 1.25 PARP(64) 0.2 PARP(67) 2.5 MSTP(91) PARP(91) 2.1 PARP(93) 15.0 5.0 UE Parameters ATLAS energy dependence! ISR Parameter Intrinsic KT MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
JIMMY at CDF JIMMY was tuned to fit the energy density in the “transverse” region for “leading jet” events! JIMMY Runs with HERWIG and adds multiple parton interactions! PT(JIM)= 2.5 GeV/c. The Energy in the “Underlying Event” in High PT Jet Production JIMMY: MPI J. M. Butterworth J. R. Forshaw M. H. Seymour PT(JIM)= 3.25 GeV/c. “Transverse” <Densities> vs PT(jet#1) MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
JIMMY at CDF JIMMY was tuned to fit the energy density in the “transverse” region for “leading jet” events! JIMMY Runs with HERWIG and adds multiple parton interactions! PT(JIM)= 2.5 GeV/c. The Energy in the “Underlying Event” in High PT Jet Production The Drell-Yan JIMMY Tune PTJIM = 3.6 GeV/c, JMRAD(73) = 1.8 JMRAD(91) = 1.8 JIMMY: MPI J. M. Butterworth J. R. Forshaw M. H. Seymour PT(JIM)= 3.25 GeV/c. “Transverse” <Densities> vs PT(jet#1) MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Charged Particle Density Data at 1.96 TeV on the density of charged particles, dN/dhdf, with pT > 0.5 GeV/c and |h| < 1 for “Z-Boson” and “Leading Jet” events as a function of the leading jet pT or PT(Z) for the “toward”, “away”, and “transverse” regions. The data are corrected to the particle level (with errors that include both the statistical error and the systematic uncertainty) and are compared with PYTHIA Tune AW and Tune A, respectively, at the particle level (i.e. generator level). MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Charged Particle Density Data at 1.96 TeV on the density of charged particles, dN/dhdf, with pT > 0.5 GeV/c and |h| < 1 for “Z-Boson” and “Leading Jet” events as a function of the leading jet pT or PT(Z) for the “transverse” and “away” regions. The data are corrected to the particle level (with errors that include both the statistical error and the systematic uncertainty) and are compared with PYTHIA Tune AW and Tune A, respectively, at the particle level (i.e. generator level). MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS Charged PTsum Density Data at 1.96 TeV on the charged scalar PTsum density, dPT/dhdf, with pT > 0.5 GeV/c and |h| < 1 for “Z-Boson” and “Leading Jet” events as a function of the leading jet pT or PT(Z) for the “toward”, “away”, and “transverse” regions. The data are corrected to the particle level (with errors that include both the statistical error and the systematic uncertainty) and are compared with PYTHIA Tune AW and Tune A, respectively, at the particle level (i.e. generator level). MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS Charged PTsum Density Data at 1.96 TeV on the charged scalar PTsum density, dPT/dhdf, with pT > 0.5 GeV/c and |h| < 1 for “Z-Boson” and “Leading Jet” events as a function of the leading jet pT or PT(Z) for the “transverse” and “away” regions. The data are corrected to the particle level (with errors that include both the statistical error and the systematic uncertainty) and are compared with PYTHIA Tune AW and Tune A, respectively, at the particle level (i.e. generator level). MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
The “TransMAX/MIN” Regions Data at 1.96 TeV on the charged particle density, dN/dhdf, with pT > 0.5 GeV/c and |h| < 1 for “Z-Boson” and “Leading Jet” events as a function of PT(Z) or the leading jet pT for the “transMAX”, and “transMIN” regions. The data are corrected to the particle level (with errors that include both the statistical error and the systematic uncertainty) and are compared with PYTHIA Tune AW and Tune A, respectively, at the particle level (i.e. generator level). MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
The “TransDIF” Density Data at 1.96 TeV on the density of charged particles, dN/dhdf, with pT > 0.5 GeV/c and |h| < 1 for “leading jet” events as a function of the leading jet pT and for Z-Boson events as a function of PT(Z) for “TransDIF” = “transMAX” minus “transMIN” regions. The data are corrected to the particle level (with errors that include both the statistical error and the systematic uncertainty) and are compared with PYTHIA Tune A and HERWIG (without MPI) at the particle level (i.e. generator level). MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
The “TransMAX/MIN” Regions Data at 1.96 TeV on the charged scalar PTsum density, dPT/dhdf, with pT > 0.5 GeV/c and |h| < 1 for “Z-Boson” and “Leading Jet” events as a function of PT(Z) or the leading jet pT for the “transMAX”, and “transMIN” regions. The data are corrected to the particle level (with errors that include both the statistical error and the systematic uncertainty) and are compared with PYTHIA Tune AW and Tune A, respectively, at the particle level (i.e. generator level). MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Charged Particle <pT> Data at 1.96 TeV on the charged particle average pT, with pT > 0.5 GeV/c and |h| < 1 for the “toward” region for “Z-Boson” and the “transverse” region for “Leading Jet” events as a function of the leading jet pT or PT(Z). The data are corrected to the particle level (with errors that include both the statistical error and the systematic uncertainty) and are compared with PYTHIA Tune AW and Tune A, respectively, at the particle level (i.e. generator level). The Z-Boson data are also compared with PYTHIA Tune DW, the ATLAS tune, and HERWIG (without MPI) MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Z-Boson: “Towards”, Transverse”, & “TransMIN” Charge Density Data at 1.96 TeV on the density of charged particles, dN/dhdf, with pT > 0.5 GeV/c and |h| < 1 for “Z-Boson” events as a function of PT(Z) for the “toward” and “transverse” regions. The data are corrected to the particle level (with errors that include both the statistical error and the systematic uncertainty) and are compared with PYTHIA Tune AW and HERWIG (without MPI) at the particle level (i.e. generator level). MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Z-Boson: “Towards” & “TransMIN” Charge Density Data at 1.96 TeV on the density of charged particles, dN/dhdf, with pT > 0.5 GeV/c and |h| < 1 for “Z-Boson” events as a function of PT(Z) for the “toward” and “transMIN” regions. The data are corrected to the particle level (with errors that include both the statistical error and the systematic uncertainty) and are compared with PYTHIA Tune AW and HERWIG (without MPI) at the particle level (i.e. generator level). MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Z-Boson: “Towards” & “TransMIN” Charge Density Data at 1.96 TeV on the charged scalar PTsum density, dPT/dhdf, with pT > 0.5 GeV/c and |h| < 1 for “Z-Boson” events as a function of PT(Z) for the “toward” and “transMIN” regions. The data are corrected to the particle level (with errors that include both the statistical error and the systematic uncertainty) and are compared with PYTHIA Tune AW and HERWIG (without MPI) at the particle level (i.e. generator level). MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Z-Boson: “Towards” Region Data at 1.96 TeV on the density of charged particles, dN/dhdf, with pT > 0.5 GeV/c and |h| < 1 for “Z-Boson” events as a function of PT(Z) for the “toward” region. The data are corrected to the particle level (with errors that include both the statistical error and the systematic uncertainty) and are compared with PYTHIA Tune AW and HERWIG (without MPI) at the particle level (i.e. generator level). MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Z-Boson: “Towards” Region HW (without MPI) almost no change! Data at 1.96 TeV on the average pT of charged particles with pT > 0.5 GeV/c and |h| < 1 for “Z-Boson” events as a function of PT(Z) for the “toward” region. The data are corrected to the particle level (with errors that include both the statistical error and the systematic uncertainty) and are compared with PYTHIA Tune AW and HERWIG (without MPI) at the particle level (i.e. generator level). MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Proton-Antiproton Collisions stot = sEL + sSD + sDD + sHC The “hard core” component contains both “hard” and “soft” collisions. MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Min-Bias Correlations New Data at 1.96 TeV on the average pT of charged particles versus the number of charged particles (pT > 0.4 GeV/c, |h| < 1) for “min-bias” collisions at CDF Run 2. The data are corrected to the particle level and are compared with PYTHIA Tune A at the particle level (i.e. generator level). MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Min-Bias: Average PT versus Nchg Beam-beam remnants (i.e. soft hard core) produces low multiplicity and small <pT> with <pT> independent of the multiplicity. = The CDF “min-bias” trigger picks up most of the “hard core” component! MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Min-Bias: Average PT versus Nchg Beam-beam remnants (i.e. soft hard core) produces low multiplicity and small <pT> with <pT> independent of the multiplicity. Hard scattering (with no MPI) produces large multiplicity and large <pT>. = + The CDF “min-bias” trigger picks up most of the “hard core” component! MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Min-Bias: Average PT versus Nchg Beam-beam remnants (i.e. soft hard core) produces low multiplicity and small <pT> with <pT> independent of the multiplicity. Hard scattering (with no MPI) produces large multiplicity and large <pT>. Hard scattering (with MPI) produces large multiplicity and medium <pT>. This observable is sensitive to the MPI tuning! = + + The CDF “min-bias” trigger picks up most of the “hard core” component! MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS Average PT versus Nchg Data at 1.96 TeV on the average pT of charged particles versus the number of charged particles (pT > 0.4 GeV/c, |h| < 1) for “min-bias” collisions at CDF Run 2. The data are corrected to the particle leveland are compared with PYTHIA Tune A, Tune DW, and the ATLAS tune at the particle level (i.e. generator level). Particle level predictions for the average pT of charged particles versus the number of charged particles (pT > 0.5 GeV/c, |h| < 1, excluding the lepton-pair) for for Drell-Yan production (70 < M(pair) < 110 GeV) at CDF Run 2. MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS Average PT versus Nchg Z-boson production (with low pT(Z) and no MPI) produces low multiplicity and small <pT>. = MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS Average PT versus Nchg No MPI! Z-boson production (with low pT(Z) and no MPI) produces low multiplicity and small <pT>. High pT Z-boson production produces large multiplicity and high <pT>. = + MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS Average PT versus Nchg No MPI! Z-boson production (with low pT(Z) and no MPI) produces low multiplicity and small <pT>. High pT Z-boson production produces large multiplicity and high <pT>. Z-boson production (with MPI) produces large multiplicity and medium <pT>. = + + MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Average PT(Z) versus Nchg No MPI! Predictions for the average PT(Z-Boson) versus the number of charged particles (pT > 0.5 GeV/c, |h| < 1, excluding the lepton-pair) for for Drell-Yan production (70 < M(pair) < 110 GeV) at CDF Run 2. Data on the average pT of charged particles versus the number of charged particles (pT > 0.5 GeV/c, |h| < 1, excluding the lepton-pair) for for Drell-Yan production (70 < M(pair) < 110 GeV) at CDF Run 2. The data are corrected to the particle level and are compared with various Monte-Carlo tunes at the particle level (i.e. generator level). MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS Average PT versus Nchg PT(Z) < 10 GeV/c No MPI! Data the average pT of charged particles versus the number of charged particles (pT > 0.5 GeV/c, |h| < 1, excluding the lepton-pair) for for Drell-Yan production (70 < M(pair) < 110 GeV, PT(pair) < 10 GeV/c) at CDF Run 2. The data are corrected to the particle level and are compared with various Monte-Carlo tunes at the particle level (i.e. generator level). MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS Average PT versus Nchg Remarkably similar behavior! Perhaps indicating that MPI playing an important role in both processes. Data the average pT of charged particles versus the number of charged particles (pT > 0.5 GeV/c, |h| < 1, excluding the lepton-pair) for for Drell-Yan production (70 < M(pair) < 110 GeV, PT(pair) < 10 GeV/c) at CDF Run 2. The data are corrected to the particle level and are compared with various Monte-Carlo tunes at the particle level (i.e. generator level). MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Fermilab Today Result of the Week MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
CDF-QCD Data for Theory Summary It is important to produce a lot of plots (corrected to the particle level) so that the theorists can tune and improve the QCD Monte-Carlo models. If they improve the “transverse” region they might miss-up the “toward” region etc.. We need to show the whole story! We are making good progress in understanding and modeling the “underlying event” in jet production and in Drell-Yan. Tune A and Tune AW describe the data very well, although not perfect. However, we do not yet have a perfect fit to all the features of the CDF “underlying event” data! Looking at <pT> versus Nchg in Drell-Yan with 70 < Mpair) < 110 GeV and PT(pair) < 5 GeV is a good way to look at MPI and the color connections. The data show the correlations expected from MPI! There are over 128 plots to get “blessed” and then to published. So far we have only looked at average quantities. We plan to also produce distributions and flow plots. CDF-QCD Data for Theory I plan to construct a “CDF-QCD Data for Theory” WEBsite with the “blessed” plots together with tables of the data points and errors so that people can have access to the results . MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS
Summary CDF-QCD Data for Theory It is important to produce a lot of plots (corrected to the particle level) so that the theorists can tune and improve the QCD Monte-Carlo models. If they improve the “transverse” region they might miss-up the “toward” region etc.. We need to show the whole story! We are making good progress in understanding and modeling the “underlying event” in jet production and in Drell-Yan. Tune A and Tune AW describe the data very well, although not perfect. However, we do not yet have a perfect fit to all the features of the CDF “underlying event” data! CDF Run 2 publication. Should be out by the end of the year! Looking at <pT> versus Nchg in Drell-Yan with 70 < Mpair) < 110 GeV and PT(pair) < 5 GeV is a good way to look at MPI and the color connections. The data show the correlations expected from MPI! There are over 128 plots to get “blessed” and then to published. So far we have only looked at average quantities. We plan to also produce distributions and flow plots. CDF-QCD Data for Theory I plan to construct a “CDF-QCD Data for Theory” WEBsite with the “blessed” plots together with tables of the data points and errors so that people can have access to the results . MC & Tuning at CMS December 16, 2008 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMS