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

2. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton2 Outline Introduction/Group Members Our Operational Responsibilities Physics Pursuits Top Physics Non-Standard Top Coupling, Dilepton signature, New physics search in Dileptons, Top to taus Electroweak Physics, W,Z production rates and asymmetries, extracting PDFs Search for heavy bosons

3. 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 (entering w/ MS) -G.-B. Yu (entering w/ MS) PI’s Senior Res. Assoc. Postdoc. Fellows Grad Students Undergrads Kevin McFarland (75%): -Anthony Vaiciulis –Gilles deLentdecker –J. Chvojka (entering) –S. Demers (4th year) –B. Y. Han (1st year) –B. Kilminster(graduating) –Jedong Lee (3 rd 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:

4. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton4 The Rochester CDF Group 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)

5. 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.

6. 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

7. 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 –Cabling and Power Supply Specifications

8. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton8 Rochester Silicon Operations, Cont. Cooling and Interlock Operations/On-Call (All) UR Person on call 24-7 for Cooling and Interlocks Tevatron Abort and Radiation Monitoring/Radiation Safety Officers (E. Halkiadakis, A.Hocker, R. Eusebi) Silicon Power Supply Working Group (A.Hocker, A.Ivanov) June 2002May 2003 Improved silicon coverage Silicon Leakage-current monitoring (Hocker, Eusebi) Silicon Online Monitoring (Halkiadakis, Coca) Typically take 95% of data with about 85% of silicon useful

9. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton9 3 rd Area of Focus: Level-3 / Data Hub (McFarland) Software trigger based on offline reconstruction –Current → Upgraded Bandwidth –Input rate: 80 → 150 MB/sec –Output: 20 → 60 MB/sec –Level-3 selections determine offline datasets after processing –Seeds both offline production and user analysis –“Data Hub” takes accepted Level-3 events, logs them and distributes to online monitoring system

10. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton10 Level-3 / Data Hub Operations Both Level-3 and the Data Hub are critical online systems –require extensive pager coverage, hardware and software maintenance Level-3 Operations (deLentdecker, Demers, B-Y Han, KSM) –Rochester personnel create all Level-3 triggers in trigger DB –Responsible for testing new filter code –Maintain software I/O infrastructure (interface between filtering software and online system) Data Hub Operations (Vaiciulis, Kilminster, Lee) –Vaiciulis serves as Data Hub sub-project leader –Rochester group carries most of pager load –Hardware maintenance (RAID arrays), software upgrades –Data Hub is key DAQ monitoring point; frequent requests for minor updates

11. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton11 Current Level-3 / Data Hub Development Level-3 Output reduction (deLentdecker, Demers, McFarland) –Level3Summary replaces and summarizes Level-3 reconstruction results –reduces event size ~25%. Adds permanent record of Level-3 results ClarkData Hub Operations (Vaiciulis, Kilminster, Lee, Clark) –to improve yield for B physics (hadronic B s final states), CDF has recently proposed doubling the data rate out of Level-3 –requires a major increase in data hub bandwidth –recent internal review has advised developing a system with triple the bandwidth within one year –Vaiciulis, Clark (NSF REU) doing preliminary tests with IDE- RAID based networkp-attached fileservers –portion of McFarland CAREER award not for outreach purchased test hardware for data hub upgrade 3ware IDE RAID controller for low-cost NAS-based Data Hub

12. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton12 CDF Data-Taking Run 1 luminosity 290 pb -1 delivered ~220 pb -1 recorded Between ~67 and 125 pb  used in analyses presented here Typically run with 85-90% efficiency Ultimately collect 4-8 fb  ~195 of 225 pb  goal delivered y.t.d. In first 6 months of 2003, UR Scientists provided 150 8-hour data-taking shifts A. Hocker is current CDF Operations Manager

13. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton13 Great Progress in One Year L1/L2/L3 rates: 18k/250/75 Hz 6k/240/30Hz ~45e30 ~15e30 Biggest run: 1553 nb-1 (run 163064) 447 nb-1 (run 145005) taken May 17-18 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)

14. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton14 Top Physics

15. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton15 SM V-A Theory: 30% F - 70% F 0 <0.04% F + (M b ) -1 Left handed F - (cos Ψ * l ) ~(1 – cos Ψ * l ) 2 0 Longitudinal F 0 (cos Ψ * l ) ~(1 - cos Ψ * l 2 ) +1 Right handed F + (cos Ψ * l ) ~(1 +cos Ψ * l ) 2 M 2 l b = ½ (M 2 T – M 2 W )(1 + cosΨ * l ) CDF Run I Preliminary Result: (Using ttbar dilepton, and lepton+jets events with 1 and 2 SVX b-tagged jets) f V+A = -0.21 +0.42 -0.25 ± 0.21 f V+A < 0.80 @ 95%CL 2000 pb -1 Run II : expected uncertainties ±0.1 (stat), ± 0.11 (sys) f V+A : 0: corresponds to all V-A, (0 % right-handed W’s) 1: corresponds to all V+A (30% right-handed W’s) H W = J P { = ^ Search for Non-Standard tbW Vertex KM,BJK

16. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton16  tt Dilepton Channel: tt  l l bb  tt = 13.2  5.9 stat  1.5 sys  0.8 lum pb NLO @  s=1.96 TeV for M top = 175 GeV ‡ : 6.70 +0.71 –0.88 pb ‡ MLM  vs. E T N jets  2 / CDF Run II Preliminary Run II Top Dilepton Summary Table: ‡ hep-ph/0303085(ML Mangano et al) - - Tipton’s Group contributed to all aspects of this analysis

17. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton17 Approximately doubles our acceptance and Uses ~125pb -1 Theoretical prediction: (6.7 +/- 0.5) pb New Results in the Dilepton Channel A. Hocker new co-leader of Top Dilepton Group Not Yet ‘Blessed’

18. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton18 Tau Dileptons: (e or  )  + jets Motivation: t  b   may have contributions not apparent in first and second generation dileptons –from either non-standard amplitudes or even from things other than top (e.g., high tanβ SUSY) Problems: –jet to  fake rates are 1-2 orders of magnitude higher than e or μ –  not fully reconstructed, Z+jets background higher McFarland’s Rochester group responsible for analysis (Demers’ thesis, Vaiciulis, Insler & Petruccelli – former REU students) Z→  +jets pseudo M  reconstruction Recent progress: –reduced largest background in Run 1 by an order of magnitude by pseudo- reconstruction of the ditau mass (Demers, Petruccelli) –optimization of cuts to lower jet fake rate (Vaiciulis) Expect 1 st result this fall

19. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton19 Testing SM with Dilepton Kinematics:The PKS test 1: 1: We plan to use the product of KS tests (PKS) to determine how consistent the kinematic features of the dilepton events are with the SM. 2: 2: We devised an a-priori technique to handle a possible excess of events in the high- energy tails of kinematic distributions, like it was in Run I. The PKS method isolates a subset of most unlikely events and determines its significance. Missing Et : Run I dilepton sample

20. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton20 Chosen kinematic variables. ttbar versus SUSY  lm Missing Et Pt of the leading lepton Angle between them Top Dilepton topological variable (goodness-of-fit from NWT)

21. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton21 Electroweak Physics

22. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton22 . B(W  e e )  Candidates: 38625 in ~ 72 pb -1  Backgrounds ~ 6 % (dominated by QCD) ‡ Nucl. Phys. B359,343 (1991) Phys.Rev. Lett. 88,201801 (2002)  ·B(W  e ) = 2.64  0.01 stat  0.09 sys  0.16 lum nb NNLO @  s=1.96 TeV ‡ : 2.69  0.10 nb W. Sakumoto,E. Halkiadakis, J.D. Lee, M.Coca, A. Hocker

23. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton23 . 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. 88,201801 (2002)  Candidates: 1631 in ~ 72 pb -1  Backgrounds: ~ 0.9 % NNLO @  s=1.96 TeV ‡ : 252  9 pb VERY CLEAN Sakumoto, J.D.Lee, E. Halkiadakis

24. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton24 W & Cross Sections vs. E CM Our new measurements NNLO

25. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton25  (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  10.69  0.27 stat  0.33 sys 2.11  0.05 stat  0.07 sys 2.11  0.05 stat  0.07 sys e+  10.54  0.18 stat  0.33 sys 2.15  0.04 stat  0.07 sys 2.15  0.04 stat  0.07 sys

26. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton26 Analyses with W/Z/Drell-Yan Rates and Asymmetries Run 1 (0.1 fb -1 ) Achievements of Rochester group –W lepton charge asymmetry (Bodek, Fan) Reduced error on W Mass from PDF uncertainties from 100 to 15 MeV Makes possible precision measurement of W mass at hadron colliders! –Use of Silicon to measure charge of forward electron tracks using extrapolation of track stubs in sillicon to shower centroid (Bodek, Fan) –Extended Z and Drell-Yan forward-backward asymmetry and rapidity distributions (Bodek, Sakumoto, Chung) Asymmetry sensitive to Z’ or other high mass states (2 sigma discrepancy at high mass in Run 1 data) Z rapidity constrains PDFs Run 2 (2 fb -1 ) we are continuing this tradition of novel analyses with these samples –repeat Z rapidity (gain in statistics important) –high mass Drell-Yan (Z’ search), new W asymmetry technique

27. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton27 Z/Drell-Yan FB Asymmetry Run I analysis - Bodek/Chung example of 500 GeV Z’ (E6 model) little observable rate effect, but large asymmetry change (Bodek, Baur)

28. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton28 Drell-Yan: Z’ Search, Z-q couplings Starting from this hint, we are proposing to combine rate AND asymmetry information to search for Z’ signal in Drell-Yan (Lee thesis, deLentdecker, McFarland) –leads to increased sensitivity Can also use Drell-Yan FB asymmetry to probe for non-standard NC couplings of quarks (deLentdecker, McFarland) –complementary to NuTeV and atomic parity violation as precise probes of Z coupling to light quarks rate only rate and asymmetry Discovery probability

29. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton29 Z Rapidity Distribution Run I analyses (Z- Bodek/Liu), (W - Bodek/Fan). Using plug electrons together with SVX tracking (Rochester plug- Rochester SVX group), MC shows definitive measurements of PDFs Z rapidity distributions and W asymmetry. 2 fb-1 Run II Analysis Bodek/Chung/J.Han Run 1 results are statistically limited; Chung/J. Han working on Run 2, particularly forward acceptance.

30. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton30 W Charge Asymmetry 2 fb-1, Run II analysis Bodek/McFarland/B.Han/Gyu Run 1 (Bodek, Fan): established d/u ratio of proton. However, measurements at high rapidity are difficult to interpret; sensitive to W p T Run 2 (Bodek, McFarland, B. Han, G.Yu): statistics will improve, but interpretation difficult. Need a new technique direct measurement of W rapidity!

31. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton31 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

32. DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton32 Conclusions U or R continues to play an indispensable role in CDF –Our Contributions to Operations for Calorimetry, Silicon and Trigger/DAQ are essential to CDF data-taking –These put us at the top of CDF University groups with critical operational commitments CDF physics program for Run II is broad and compelling, even if only 4fb -1 are collected –Many ways to make precision tests of the Standard Model in top and EWK sector. UR led CDF physics program is also broad and compelling – marked by continued innovation