1. October 5, 2004SUSY Meeting -- M.Rossi1 the Udine approach to SUSY Multileptons Udine University M.P.Giordani, G.Pauletta, M.Rossi

2. October 5, 2004SUSY Meeting -- M.Rossi2 Analysis Approach  follow same approach of RunI analysis dilepton trigger 1 tight + 2 loose offline leptons  in this talk: RunII SUSY dilepton trigger Trigger strategy (CDF6074) Towards a good run list: method Cross section studies Conclusions/Plans

3. October 5, 2004SUSY Meeting -- M.Rossi3 Trigger Strategy (1)  achieve maximum acceptance/efficiency SUSY yields leptons through cascade decays leptons typically produced with low p T  multipath dilepton trigger two low p T leptons (baseline) lepton + track (recover stub/cluster inefficiency) Single high p T lepton (best high p T multilepton efficiency)  all paths contribute to acceptance

4. October 5, 2004SUSY Meeting -- M.Rossi4 Trigger Strategy (2)  define standard lepton objects lepton object definitions @ trigger level do not depend on specific trigger path  simplification of trigger calibration compute efficiency for each lepton object combine lepton objects into trigger paths L1 & L2 efficiency can be computed by comparing single lepton with dilepton paths  detector conditions naturally folded in

5. October 5, 2004SUSY Meeting -- M.Rossi5 Data selection  ONLINE bits required to be good: CLC,L1T,L2T,L3T,CAL,COT  OFFLINE bits required to be good: COT,CAL  From 2002 to 02.13.2004 (no runs with COT problems)  Using pre filter data 1324 RUNS, 257 pb -1 DQM CRITERIA

6. October 5, 2004SUSY Meeting -- M.Rossi6 Towards a good run list: method Instead of ~20 trigger paths 6 lepton objects: CEM4, CEM8, PEM8, CMU4, CMUP4, CMX4  Define STANDARD LEPTON OBJECT example: CEM4 = L1_CEM4_PT4 & L2_CEM4_PT4_CES2  Identify suitable monitoring variable  Look for suspect runs  GOOD RUN LIST PER LEPTON OBJECT

7. October 5, 2004SUSY Meeting -- M.Rossi7 TRIGGER PATH = lepton 1 & lepton 2 For each TRIGGER PATH count: D 1 : # triggered evts N 1 : " with offline lepton 1 D 2 : # triggered evts N 2 : " with offline lepton 2 Towards a good run list: R variable satisfying STANDARD lepton 1 DEFINITION satisfying STANDARD lepton 2 DEFINITION R 1 =N 1 /D 1 R 2 =N 2 /D 2  sort of purity  expect no significant differences between different trigger paths for each lepton type  expect stable in time

8. October 5, 2004SUSY Meeting -- M.Rossi8 Towards a good run list: R variable CEM4

9. October 5, 2004SUSY Meeting -- M.Rossi9  Test for R indipendence of trigger path for each lepton type 1. For each run compute R average of all paths for each lepton type  R lepton 2. R = value for the single trigger path if |R-R lepton | > 5σ, then the run is suspect  Test for R stability in time 1. Compute local average of R lepton over 20 runs before and after  2. If |R lepton - | > 5σ, then the run is suspect Towards a good run list: suspect run

10. October 5, 2004SUSY Meeting -- M.Rossi10  First estimate of suspect run luminosity for CEM4 lepton object is 0 pb -1 Towards a good run list: suspect run R CEM4

11. October 5, 2004SUSY Meeting -- M.Rossi11 Trigger cross sections  complementary trigger path studies:  L2 exclusive cross sections  L2 instantaneous luminosity dependence PHYSICS_2_01_v4 (Feb. 2004) L2_CEM8_PT8_CES2_&_TRK8 L2_TRK8_L1_CMUP6_PT4 L2_CEM12_PT8 PHYSICS_2_05_v10 (June 2004) L2_CEM8_PT8_CES3_&_TRK8 L2_CMUP6_PT8 L2_CEM8_PT8_CES3_DPS

12. October 5, 2004SUSY Meeting -- M.Rossi12 Exclusive Total  L2_CEM8_PT8_CES2_&_TRK8 4% 100 nb  L2_TRK8_L1_CMUP6_PT4 32% 180 nb  L2_CEM12_PT8 20% 250 nb Using L3 Monitor dataset (MONITOR_L3TAG_PS200) calculated L2 complementary trigger path cross sections Using L3 Monitor dataset (MONITOR_L3TAG_PS200) calculated L2 complementary trigger path cross sections Trigger cross sections

13. October 5, 2004SUSY Meeting -- M.Rossi13 Events L int (nb -1 ) σ (nb) Events L int (nb -1 ) L2_CEM12_PT8 L2_CEM8_PT8_DPS Trigger cross sections

14. October 5, 2004SUSY Meeting -- M.Rossi14 Conclusions  Monitoring strategy almost defined  Variables (R) behaves as expected  Stable in time  Steps correlated to trigger table changes  Good run list on the way  Very low rejection based on R  Comparison with evaluation based on rate underway  Trigger cross section studies in progress  High degree of overlap our complementary and other triggers  Implications depend on future choices of TDWG

15. October 5, 2004SUSY Meeting -- M.Rossi15 Next  Per lepton object:  Finalize good run list  Calculate efficiency