DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton1 University of Rochester Participation in CDF

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton2 Outline Introduction/Group Members Our Operational Responsibilities Physics Pursuits W/Z Physics Heavy Zs Top Physics W Helicity and New physics search in Dileptons Top to taus

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton3 Current CDF Group Members Arie Bodek (50%): -Howard Budd (50%) -Pawel DeBarbaro (10%) -Willis Sakumoto -Yeon Sei Chung (95%) -Phil Yoon (4 th year) (acc. Phys., FNAL Support) -J.-Y. Han (1 st year-with MS) -G.-B. Yu (1 st year-with MS) PI’s Senior Res. Assoc. Postdoc. Fellows Grad Students Undergrads Kevin McFarland (75%?): -Anthony Vaiciulis –Gilles deLentdecker –J. Chvojka (1 st year) –B. Kilminster(graduating) –S. Kenezny(4 th year) –Jedong Lee (2 nd year) –B. Y. Han (2nd year) –Chris Clark (REU) Three sub-groups function as one on many projects, but primary hardware/physics interests align us as follows: Paul Tipton (75%): –Eva Halkiadakis(90%) –Andy Hocker (90%) –M. Coca (5 th year) –R. Eusebi (70%, 3 rd year) –Andrew Ivanov (5 th year) –Sarah Lockwitz (REU) Color KEY:

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton4 CDF CDF effort led by Bodek, Tipton, McFarland We are focused on: –Tests of the SM in and around the top candidate sample –Production and decay parameters of the Top Quark –Electroweak physics with W and Z Bosons –Search for new W and Z Bosons –Higgs Search –Much experience from Run I (top discovery, heavy Z searches, etc)

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton5 Rochester’s Three Areas of Focus and Operational Responsibility Run 2 forward calorimeter -- ‘endplug’ (Bodek) –Hadronic section a Rochester- led effort –Constructed at FNAL with Rochester physicists and technicians doing fabrication, QA. – Rochester in charge of test beam calibration, calibration at B0, installation, commissioning and operations. –Fermilab responsibility - phototubes and bases Note: A lot of Physics (e.g. W Asymmetry, W Mass, PDFs needs the plug.

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton6 CDF Plug Operations Run 2 Problem: Degradation of both EM and Hadron Plug calorimeter response at forward plug  (eta) Investigated ->by our group using the laser monitoring system. Problem narrowed down to degradation of phototubes due to high current associated with beam. Solution ->(a) Lower the voltage to fix the problem. (b)Correct older data using the laser information Central-Plug Z mass constant after the application of Laser gain corrections

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton7 Rochester Silicon Operations Second area of Focus: Silicon Tracking Run 2 SVXII (Tipton) –Rochester group contributed to SVXII Ladder and Barrel fabrication –Silicon Cooling and Interlocks –Radiation Monitoring and Tevatron abort –Commissioning and Operations

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton8 Rochester Silicon Operations, Cont. Second area of Focus: Silicon Tracking Run 2 SVXII (Tipton) –Rochester group contributed to SVXII Ladder and Barrel fabrication –Silicon Cooling and Interlocks –Radiation Monitoring and Tevatron abort –Commissioning and Operations

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton9 CDF, cont Third area of Focus: Level 3 Trigger/Data Hub Level 3 (McFarland) –Responsible for software trigger based on offline reconstruction –Current → Run2b Bandwidth –Input rate: 80 → 200 MB/sec –Output: 20 → 60 MB/sec –“Data Hub” takes accepted Level-3 events, logs them and distributes to online monitoring system –Level-3 selections determine offline datasets after processing –Allows CDF to find events in its firehose of a datastream

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton10 CDF Data-Taking Run 1 luminosity 260 pb -1 delivered ~200 pb -1 recorded Between ~67 and 130 pb  used in analyses presented here Typically run with 85-90% efficiency Ultimately collect 4-8 fb  ~190 of 225 pb  goal delivered y.t.d.

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton11 Great Progress in One Year L1/L2/L3 rates: 18k/250/75 Hz 6k/240/30Hz ~45e30 ~15e30 Biggest run: 1553 nb-1 (run ) 447 nb-1 (run ) taken May th 17h w. Si. taken May 17, 11h w Si. Highest Init. Lum. 47.5e30 (May 17 th )20.6e30 (May 19 th ) Best store CDF int. Lum 1553 nb-1 (one run)602 nb-1 (4 runs) (store 2555, May 17th) (Store 1332, May 17 th ) Best “CDF-week” 9.1 (pb-1)/10.3 (pb-1) 2.97 (pb-1)/3.47 (pb-1) (most pb-1 to tape) (week of May 11th) (week of May 16th) Best Store Efficiency 94.2% with Si (1 run)93.2% no Si (4 runs) (May 17 th, 9.1 of 10.3 pb-1) (May 16 th, 506 of 543 nb-1) Now (2003) 1 year ago (2002)

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton12 Silicon Performance Inclusive B lifetime with J/  ’s c  =458±10 stat. ±11 syst.  m (PDG: 469±4  m) Exclusive B +  J/    lifetime c  =446 ±43 stat. ±13 syst.  m (PDG: 502±5  m) More mass plots B s  J/  18.4/pb 11 micron resolution

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton13 . B(W  e e )  Candidates: in ~ 72 pb -1  Backgrounds ~ 6 % (dominated by QCD) ‡ Nucl. Phys. B359,343 (1991) Phys.Rev. Lett. 88, (2002)  ·B(W  e ) = 2.64  0.01 stat  0.09 sys  0.16 lum nb  s=1.96 TeV ‡ : 2.69  0.10 nb

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton14 Run 2 Measurements of  W  e,  ) MTMT  B(W   ) = 2.70±.04 stat ±.19 syst ±.27 lum 5547 candidates in 10 pb candidates in 16 pb -1  W *BR(W  e ) (nb) = 2.60±0.07 stat ±0.11 syst ± 0.26 lum Run 1 scaled to 1.96 TeV: 2.72±0.02 stat ±0.09 syst ±0.10 lum

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton15 . B(Z 0  l + l - )  Candidates: 1830 in ~ 72 pb -1  Backgrounds ~ 0.6 %  ·B(Z 0  ee) = 267  6 stat  15 sys  16 lum pb  ·B(Z 0  ) = 246  6 stat  12 sys  15 lum pb ‡ Nucl. Phys. B359,343 (1991) Phys.Rev. Lett. 88, (2002)  Candidates: 1631 in ~ 72 pb -1  Backgrounds: ~ 0.9 %  s=1.96 TeV ‡ : 252  9 pb VERY CLEAN

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton16 W & Cross Sections vs. E CM Our new measurements NNLO

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton17  (W)  (pp  Z)  (W)  (Z  ee)  (pp  W)  (W  e )  (Z) R R = Theoreticalprediction PDGSMPDG combined Exp Measure Extract R  (W) [GeV] e 9.88  0.24 stat  0.47 sys 9.88  0.24 stat  0.47 sys 2.29  0.06 stat  0.10 sys   0.27 stat  0.33 sys 2.11  0.05 stat  0.07 sys 2.11  0.05 stat  0.07 sys e+   0.18 stat  0.33 sys 2.15  0.04 stat  0.07 sys 2.15  0.04 stat  0.07 sys

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton18  tt Dilepton Channel: tt  l l bb  tt = 13.2  5.9 stat  1.5 sys  0.8 lum pb  s=1.96 TeV for M top = 175 GeV ‡ : –0.88 pb ‡ MLM  vs. E T N jets  2 / CDF Run II Preliminary - Run II Top Dilepton Summary Table: ‡ hep-ph/ (ML Mangano et al) - -

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton19 Using ~125pb -1 Theoretical prediction: (6.7 +/- 0.5) pb New Results for  tt in the Dilepton Channel: tt  l l bb

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton20 Inventing New Experimental and Analysis Techniques (1)In Run I- 0.1 fb-1. Rochester’s analysis of the W Asymmetry (Bodek,Fan) has led to the reduction on the error on the W mass from PDF uncertainties from 100 MeV down to 15 MeV. Made precision measurements of the W mass at hadron colliders possible. -- In Run I - A new experimental technique (Bodek-Fan) to identify e+ and e- was invented for this purpose to extend the asymmetry to the forward direction. It combines extrapolation of tracks in the SVX with the position of the shower centroid in the plug calorimeter. If the centroid was shifter to one side it was an electron, if it was on the other, it was a positron, -- In run I - This technique was also used to measure the Z and DY forward-backward asymmetry. Z - Y distributions were measured (constrains PDFs). High Mass DY-FB Asymmetry shows 2 sigma deviation from SM (possible Z’ ?). (2) Run-II Investigating physics with fb-1. Developing newer (Bodek,McFarland) techniques to do physics with W’s, Z’s and DY.

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton21 Run I versus Run II Rochester analyses 0.1 fm-1 vs 2 fm-1 2 fm-1 Run I analysis - Bodek/Chung Run II analysis - McFarland/Lee

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton22 Run I versus Run II Rochester analyses 0.1 fm-1 vs 2 fm-1 Run I analyses (Z- Bodek/Liu), (W - Bodel/Fan). Run II: Using plug electrons together with SVX tracking (Rochester plug-Rocheser SVX group), MC shows definitive measurements of PDFs from W and Z y-distributions and asymmetry.) 2 fm-1, Run II analysis Bodek/McFarland/Han/Gyu 2 fm-1 Run II Analysis Bodek/Chung/Han

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton23 Constraining PDFs : (d/u) with W asymmetry; (d+u) with y distribution for Z’s and W’s New technique to unfold the two y w solutions to get the true W production asymmetry -being developed by Bodek, McFarland- expected errors. Shown: Measure W decay lepton charge asymmetry - V-A has opposite asymemtry. Unkown neutrino Z momentum yields two solutions for y w Needed to Limit the Error on W Mass from PDFs uncertainties U-quark carries more momentum than d-quark New technique

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton24 Constraining PDFs : (d/u) with W asymmetry; (d+u) with y distribution for Z’s and W’s W generated y distribution for 0.5 fb-1. W has higher statistics but cannot be measured directly. Determine indirectly via decay lepton and deconvolution of the two y1 and y2 solutions with the W asymmetry for Central and Plug electrons. Z generated y distribution for 1.5 fb-1 Z can be measured directly using Plug-Plug events (but cross section is lower than W). Provides constraints on W y distribution and on (u+d). (get d/u from W Asymmetry). W with 0.5 fb-1 generated Z with 1.5 fb-1 - generated

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton25 Conclusions U or R continues to play an indispensable role in CDF