Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash

Horst D Wahl

Florida State University

DIS 2005

Madison

Outline

Tevatron and DOslash detector Bottomonium ϒ(1S) production High pt μ-tagged jet production conclusion

Tevatron ndash data taking

peak luminosity in 2005 above 1032 cm-2 s-1

DOslash collected gt 690 pb-1

Results shown use 150 - 300pb-1

Leading order

Flavor creation

Next to leading order

Flavor excitation

Gluon splitting

Recent developments

Beyond NLO resummation of log(ptm) terms FONLL Changes in extraction of fragmentation function from LEP data New PDFs Improved treatment of experimental inputs

(use b-jets and b-hadrons instead of b-quarks)

Open Heavy Flavor Production

Long-standing ldquodiscrepanciesrdquo between predicted and measured cross sections now resolved eg Cacciari Frixione Mangano Nason RidolfiJHEP 0407 (2004) 033

combined effects of better calculations (Fixed order (NLO)+ NLL= FONLL) relationshipdifference between e+eminusand hadron colliders different moments of FF relevant better estimate of theory errors (upward) new appreciation of issues withldquoquark-levelrdquo measurements

Total Cross sections (from CDF) ndashinclusive b cross section |ylt1| 294plusmn06plusmn62 microb hep-ex0412071

(submitted to PRD) inclusive c cross section ~50x higherPRL 91 241804 (2003)

Comments Tevatron as HF Factory 1048707The cross sections given on the previous slide imply

central (|y|lt1) brsquos at 3kHz at current luminosities ~2x this if you look out to |y|lt2 central charm at 150kHz ndash~2x1010 brsquos already seen by CDF and DOslash in Run II ndash~1x1012 charm hadrons already produced()

rArr Near infinite statistics for some measurements rArr If you can trigger

Rely heavily on muon triggers Jψ decays are golden semi-leptonic decays- rare decays with leptons

Tracks with significant bσb Missing neutrals troublesome

forget o identification all-charged decay modes

Muon Toroid

Calorimeter

Solenoid Tracking System (CFT SMT)

The DOslash Detector

ForwardPreshower detector

Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker

Solenoid Central Preshower detector

125 cm

50cm

20cm

DOslash tracking system

DOslash - Muon detectors

Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)

Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)

A-Scint

Forward Tracker (MDTs)

Shielding

Bottom BC Scint

PDTrsquosForward

Trigger Scint

Bottomonium production

Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on

boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD

factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)

color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models

Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions

Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted

ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary

vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states

(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection

- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and

Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV

Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash

Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV

Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements

EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026

VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020

The Analysis

Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges

0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection

Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system

pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the

Silicon Tracker

d2σ((1S))

dpt times dy

N()

L times Δpt times Δy times ε

acctimes ε

trigtimes k

dimutimes k

trktimes k

qual

=

L Luminosity kdimu

local muon reconstructiony rapidity k

trk tracking

εacc

Acceptance kqual

track quality cuts ε

trig Trigger

00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε

acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027

εtrig

070 073 082k

dimu 085 088 095

ktrk

099 099 095 k

qual 085 085 093

Efficiencieshellip

Cross section

MC Data

pt(μ)

in GeV

0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6

η(μ) φ(μ)

06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV

Data vs Monte Carlo

To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once

Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with

masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23

free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3

Background 3rd order polynomial

All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV

m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV

0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18

PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV

00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb

06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb

12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb

00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb

Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)

Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)

σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)

Pythia

Comparison with previous results

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Outline

Tevatron and DOslash detector Bottomonium ϒ(1S) production High pt μ-tagged jet production conclusion

Tevatron ndash data taking

peak luminosity in 2005 above 1032 cm-2 s-1

DOslash collected gt 690 pb-1

Results shown use 150 - 300pb-1

Leading order

Flavor creation

Next to leading order

Flavor excitation

Gluon splitting

Recent developments

Beyond NLO resummation of log(ptm) terms FONLL Changes in extraction of fragmentation function from LEP data New PDFs Improved treatment of experimental inputs

(use b-jets and b-hadrons instead of b-quarks)

Open Heavy Flavor Production

Long-standing ldquodiscrepanciesrdquo between predicted and measured cross sections now resolved eg Cacciari Frixione Mangano Nason RidolfiJHEP 0407 (2004) 033

combined effects of better calculations (Fixed order (NLO)+ NLL= FONLL) relationshipdifference between e+eminusand hadron colliders different moments of FF relevant better estimate of theory errors (upward) new appreciation of issues withldquoquark-levelrdquo measurements

Total Cross sections (from CDF) ndashinclusive b cross section |ylt1| 294plusmn06plusmn62 microb hep-ex0412071

(submitted to PRD) inclusive c cross section ~50x higherPRL 91 241804 (2003)

Comments Tevatron as HF Factory 1048707The cross sections given on the previous slide imply

central (|y|lt1) brsquos at 3kHz at current luminosities ~2x this if you look out to |y|lt2 central charm at 150kHz ndash~2x1010 brsquos already seen by CDF and DOslash in Run II ndash~1x1012 charm hadrons already produced()

rArr Near infinite statistics for some measurements rArr If you can trigger

Rely heavily on muon triggers Jψ decays are golden semi-leptonic decays- rare decays with leptons

Tracks with significant bσb Missing neutrals troublesome

forget o identification all-charged decay modes

Muon Toroid

Calorimeter

Solenoid Tracking System (CFT SMT)

The DOslash Detector

ForwardPreshower detector

Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker

Solenoid Central Preshower detector

125 cm

50cm

20cm

DOslash tracking system

DOslash - Muon detectors

Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)

Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)

A-Scint

Forward Tracker (MDTs)

Shielding

Bottom BC Scint

PDTrsquosForward

Trigger Scint

Bottomonium production

Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on

boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD

factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)

color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models

Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions

Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted

ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary

vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states

(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection

- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and

Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV

Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash

Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV

Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements

EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026

VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020

The Analysis

Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges

0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection

Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system

pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the

Silicon Tracker

d2σ((1S))

dpt times dy

N()

L times Δpt times Δy times ε

acctimes ε

trigtimes k

dimutimes k

trktimes k

qual

=

L Luminosity kdimu

local muon reconstructiony rapidity k

trk tracking

εacc

Acceptance kqual

track quality cuts ε

trig Trigger

00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε

acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027

εtrig

070 073 082k

dimu 085 088 095

ktrk

099 099 095 k

qual 085 085 093

Efficiencieshellip

Cross section

MC Data

pt(μ)

in GeV

0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6

η(μ) φ(μ)

06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV

Data vs Monte Carlo

To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once

Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with

masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23

free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3

Background 3rd order polynomial

All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV

m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV

0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18

PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV

00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb

06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb

12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb

00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb

Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)

Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)

σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)

Pythia

Comparison with previous results

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Tevatron ndash data taking

peak luminosity in 2005 above 1032 cm-2 s-1

DOslash collected gt 690 pb-1

Results shown use 150 - 300pb-1

Leading order

Flavor creation

Next to leading order

Flavor excitation

Gluon splitting

Recent developments

Beyond NLO resummation of log(ptm) terms FONLL Changes in extraction of fragmentation function from LEP data New PDFs Improved treatment of experimental inputs

(use b-jets and b-hadrons instead of b-quarks)

Open Heavy Flavor Production

Long-standing ldquodiscrepanciesrdquo between predicted and measured cross sections now resolved eg Cacciari Frixione Mangano Nason RidolfiJHEP 0407 (2004) 033

combined effects of better calculations (Fixed order (NLO)+ NLL= FONLL) relationshipdifference between e+eminusand hadron colliders different moments of FF relevant better estimate of theory errors (upward) new appreciation of issues withldquoquark-levelrdquo measurements

Total Cross sections (from CDF) ndashinclusive b cross section |ylt1| 294plusmn06plusmn62 microb hep-ex0412071

(submitted to PRD) inclusive c cross section ~50x higherPRL 91 241804 (2003)

Comments Tevatron as HF Factory 1048707The cross sections given on the previous slide imply

central (|y|lt1) brsquos at 3kHz at current luminosities ~2x this if you look out to |y|lt2 central charm at 150kHz ndash~2x1010 brsquos already seen by CDF and DOslash in Run II ndash~1x1012 charm hadrons already produced()

rArr Near infinite statistics for some measurements rArr If you can trigger

Rely heavily on muon triggers Jψ decays are golden semi-leptonic decays- rare decays with leptons

Tracks with significant bσb Missing neutrals troublesome

forget o identification all-charged decay modes

Muon Toroid

Calorimeter

Solenoid Tracking System (CFT SMT)

The DOslash Detector

ForwardPreshower detector

Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker

Solenoid Central Preshower detector

125 cm

50cm

20cm

DOslash tracking system

DOslash - Muon detectors

Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)

Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)

A-Scint

Forward Tracker (MDTs)

Shielding

Bottom BC Scint

PDTrsquosForward

Trigger Scint

Bottomonium production

Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on

boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD

factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)

color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models

Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions

Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted

ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary

vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states

(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection

- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and

Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV

Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash

Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV

Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements

EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026

VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020

The Analysis

Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges

0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection

Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system

pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the

Silicon Tracker

d2σ((1S))

dpt times dy

N()

L times Δpt times Δy times ε

acctimes ε

trigtimes k

dimutimes k

trktimes k

qual

=

L Luminosity kdimu

local muon reconstructiony rapidity k

trk tracking

εacc

Acceptance kqual

track quality cuts ε

trig Trigger

00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε

acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027

εtrig

070 073 082k

dimu 085 088 095

ktrk

099 099 095 k

qual 085 085 093

Efficiencieshellip

Cross section

MC Data

pt(μ)

in GeV

0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6

η(μ) φ(μ)

06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV

Data vs Monte Carlo

To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once

Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with

masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23

free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3

Background 3rd order polynomial

All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV

m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV

0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18

PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV

00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb

06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb

12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb

00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb

Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)

Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)

σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)

Pythia

Comparison with previous results

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Leading order

Flavor creation

Next to leading order

Flavor excitation

Gluon splitting

Recent developments

Beyond NLO resummation of log(ptm) terms FONLL Changes in extraction of fragmentation function from LEP data New PDFs Improved treatment of experimental inputs

(use b-jets and b-hadrons instead of b-quarks)

Open Heavy Flavor Production

Long-standing ldquodiscrepanciesrdquo between predicted and measured cross sections now resolved eg Cacciari Frixione Mangano Nason RidolfiJHEP 0407 (2004) 033

combined effects of better calculations (Fixed order (NLO)+ NLL= FONLL) relationshipdifference between e+eminusand hadron colliders different moments of FF relevant better estimate of theory errors (upward) new appreciation of issues withldquoquark-levelrdquo measurements

Total Cross sections (from CDF) ndashinclusive b cross section |ylt1| 294plusmn06plusmn62 microb hep-ex0412071

(submitted to PRD) inclusive c cross section ~50x higherPRL 91 241804 (2003)

Comments Tevatron as HF Factory 1048707The cross sections given on the previous slide imply

central (|y|lt1) brsquos at 3kHz at current luminosities ~2x this if you look out to |y|lt2 central charm at 150kHz ndash~2x1010 brsquos already seen by CDF and DOslash in Run II ndash~1x1012 charm hadrons already produced()

rArr Near infinite statistics for some measurements rArr If you can trigger

Rely heavily on muon triggers Jψ decays are golden semi-leptonic decays- rare decays with leptons

Tracks with significant bσb Missing neutrals troublesome

forget o identification all-charged decay modes

Muon Toroid

Calorimeter

Solenoid Tracking System (CFT SMT)

The DOslash Detector

ForwardPreshower detector

Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker

Solenoid Central Preshower detector

125 cm

50cm

20cm

DOslash tracking system

DOslash - Muon detectors

Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)

Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)

A-Scint

Forward Tracker (MDTs)

Shielding

Bottom BC Scint

PDTrsquosForward

Trigger Scint

Bottomonium production

Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on

boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD

factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)

color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models

Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions

Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted

ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary

vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states

(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection

- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and

Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV

Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash

Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV

Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements

EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026

VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020

The Analysis

Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges

0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection

Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system

pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the

Silicon Tracker

d2σ((1S))

dpt times dy

N()

L times Δpt times Δy times ε

acctimes ε

trigtimes k

dimutimes k

trktimes k

qual

=

L Luminosity kdimu

local muon reconstructiony rapidity k

trk tracking

εacc

Acceptance kqual

track quality cuts ε

trig Trigger

00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε

acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027

εtrig

070 073 082k

dimu 085 088 095

ktrk

099 099 095 k

qual 085 085 093

Efficiencieshellip

Cross section

MC Data

pt(μ)

in GeV

0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6

η(μ) φ(μ)

06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV

Data vs Monte Carlo

To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once

Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with

masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23

free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3

Background 3rd order polynomial

All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV

m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV

0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18

PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV

00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb

06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb

12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb

00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb

Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)

Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)

σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)

Pythia

Comparison with previous results

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Recent developments

Beyond NLO resummation of log(ptm) terms FONLL Changes in extraction of fragmentation function from LEP data New PDFs Improved treatment of experimental inputs

(use b-jets and b-hadrons instead of b-quarks)

Open Heavy Flavor Production

Long-standing ldquodiscrepanciesrdquo between predicted and measured cross sections now resolved eg Cacciari Frixione Mangano Nason RidolfiJHEP 0407 (2004) 033

combined effects of better calculations (Fixed order (NLO)+ NLL= FONLL) relationshipdifference between e+eminusand hadron colliders different moments of FF relevant better estimate of theory errors (upward) new appreciation of issues withldquoquark-levelrdquo measurements

Total Cross sections (from CDF) ndashinclusive b cross section |ylt1| 294plusmn06plusmn62 microb hep-ex0412071

(submitted to PRD) inclusive c cross section ~50x higherPRL 91 241804 (2003)

Comments Tevatron as HF Factory 1048707The cross sections given on the previous slide imply

central (|y|lt1) brsquos at 3kHz at current luminosities ~2x this if you look out to |y|lt2 central charm at 150kHz ndash~2x1010 brsquos already seen by CDF and DOslash in Run II ndash~1x1012 charm hadrons already produced()

rArr Near infinite statistics for some measurements rArr If you can trigger

Rely heavily on muon triggers Jψ decays are golden semi-leptonic decays- rare decays with leptons

Tracks with significant bσb Missing neutrals troublesome

forget o identification all-charged decay modes

Muon Toroid

Calorimeter

Solenoid Tracking System (CFT SMT)

The DOslash Detector

ForwardPreshower detector

Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker

Solenoid Central Preshower detector

125 cm

50cm

20cm

DOslash tracking system

DOslash - Muon detectors

Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)

Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)

A-Scint

Forward Tracker (MDTs)

Shielding

Bottom BC Scint

PDTrsquosForward

Trigger Scint

Bottomonium production

Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on

boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD

factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)

color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models

Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions

Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted

ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary

vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states

(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection

- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and

Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV

Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash

Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV

Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements

EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026

VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020

The Analysis

Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges

0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection

Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system

pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the

Silicon Tracker

d2σ((1S))

dpt times dy

N()

L times Δpt times Δy times ε

acctimes ε

trigtimes k

dimutimes k

trktimes k

qual

=

L Luminosity kdimu

local muon reconstructiony rapidity k

trk tracking

εacc

Acceptance kqual

track quality cuts ε

trig Trigger

00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε

acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027

εtrig

070 073 082k

dimu 085 088 095

ktrk

099 099 095 k

qual 085 085 093

Efficiencieshellip

Cross section

MC Data

pt(μ)

in GeV

0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6

η(μ) φ(μ)

06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV

Data vs Monte Carlo

To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once

Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with

masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23

free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3

Background 3rd order polynomial

All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV

m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV

0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18

PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV

00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb

06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb

12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb

00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb

Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)

Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)

σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)

Pythia

Comparison with previous results

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Open Heavy Flavor Production

Long-standing ldquodiscrepanciesrdquo between predicted and measured cross sections now resolved eg Cacciari Frixione Mangano Nason RidolfiJHEP 0407 (2004) 033

combined effects of better calculations (Fixed order (NLO)+ NLL= FONLL) relationshipdifference between e+eminusand hadron colliders different moments of FF relevant better estimate of theory errors (upward) new appreciation of issues withldquoquark-levelrdquo measurements

Total Cross sections (from CDF) ndashinclusive b cross section |ylt1| 294plusmn06plusmn62 microb hep-ex0412071

(submitted to PRD) inclusive c cross section ~50x higherPRL 91 241804 (2003)

Comments Tevatron as HF Factory 1048707The cross sections given on the previous slide imply

central (|y|lt1) brsquos at 3kHz at current luminosities ~2x this if you look out to |y|lt2 central charm at 150kHz ndash~2x1010 brsquos already seen by CDF and DOslash in Run II ndash~1x1012 charm hadrons already produced()

rArr Near infinite statistics for some measurements rArr If you can trigger

Rely heavily on muon triggers Jψ decays are golden semi-leptonic decays- rare decays with leptons

Tracks with significant bσb Missing neutrals troublesome

forget o identification all-charged decay modes

Muon Toroid

Calorimeter

Solenoid Tracking System (CFT SMT)

The DOslash Detector

ForwardPreshower detector

Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker

Solenoid Central Preshower detector

125 cm

50cm

20cm

DOslash tracking system

DOslash - Muon detectors

Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)

Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)

A-Scint

Forward Tracker (MDTs)

Shielding

Bottom BC Scint

PDTrsquosForward

Trigger Scint

Bottomonium production

Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on

boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD

factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)

color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models

Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions

Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted

ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary

vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states

(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection

- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and

Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV

Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash

Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV

Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements

EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026

VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020

The Analysis

Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges

0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection

Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system

pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the

Silicon Tracker

d2σ((1S))

dpt times dy

N()

L times Δpt times Δy times ε

acctimes ε

trigtimes k

dimutimes k

trktimes k

qual

=

L Luminosity kdimu

local muon reconstructiony rapidity k

trk tracking

εacc

Acceptance kqual

track quality cuts ε

trig Trigger

00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε

acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027

εtrig

070 073 082k

dimu 085 088 095

ktrk

099 099 095 k

qual 085 085 093

Efficiencieshellip

Cross section

MC Data

pt(μ)

in GeV

0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6

η(μ) φ(μ)

06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV

Data vs Monte Carlo

To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once

Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with

masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23

free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3

Background 3rd order polynomial

All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV

m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV

0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18

PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV

00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb

06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb

12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb

00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb

Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)

Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)

σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)

Pythia

Comparison with previous results

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Comments Tevatron as HF Factory 1048707The cross sections given on the previous slide imply

central (|y|lt1) brsquos at 3kHz at current luminosities ~2x this if you look out to |y|lt2 central charm at 150kHz ndash~2x1010 brsquos already seen by CDF and DOslash in Run II ndash~1x1012 charm hadrons already produced()

rArr Near infinite statistics for some measurements rArr If you can trigger

Rely heavily on muon triggers Jψ decays are golden semi-leptonic decays- rare decays with leptons

Tracks with significant bσb Missing neutrals troublesome

forget o identification all-charged decay modes

Muon Toroid

Calorimeter

Solenoid Tracking System (CFT SMT)

The DOslash Detector

ForwardPreshower detector

Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker

Solenoid Central Preshower detector

125 cm

50cm

20cm

DOslash tracking system

DOslash - Muon detectors

Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)

Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)

A-Scint

Forward Tracker (MDTs)

Shielding

Bottom BC Scint

PDTrsquosForward

Trigger Scint

Bottomonium production

Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on

boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD

factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)

color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models

Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions

Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted

ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary

vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states

(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection

- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and

Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV

Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash

Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV

Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements

EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026

VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020

The Analysis

Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges

0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection

Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system

pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the

Silicon Tracker

d2σ((1S))

dpt times dy

N()

L times Δpt times Δy times ε

acctimes ε

trigtimes k

dimutimes k

trktimes k

qual

=

L Luminosity kdimu

local muon reconstructiony rapidity k

trk tracking

εacc

Acceptance kqual

track quality cuts ε

trig Trigger

00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε

acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027

εtrig

070 073 082k

dimu 085 088 095

ktrk

099 099 095 k

qual 085 085 093

Efficiencieshellip

Cross section

MC Data

pt(μ)

in GeV

0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6

η(μ) φ(μ)

06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV

Data vs Monte Carlo

To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once

Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with

masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23

free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3

Background 3rd order polynomial

All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV

m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV

0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18

PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV

00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb

06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb

12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb

00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb

Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)

Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)

σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)

Pythia

Comparison with previous results

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Muon Toroid

Calorimeter

Solenoid Tracking System (CFT SMT)

The DOslash Detector

ForwardPreshower detector

Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker

Solenoid Central Preshower detector

125 cm

50cm

20cm

DOslash tracking system

DOslash - Muon detectors

Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)

Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)

A-Scint

Forward Tracker (MDTs)

Shielding

Bottom BC Scint

PDTrsquosForward

Trigger Scint

Bottomonium production

Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on

boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD

factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)

color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models

Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions

Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted

ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary

vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states

(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection

- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and

Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV

Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash

Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV

Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements

EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026

VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020

The Analysis

Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges

0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection

Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system

pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the

Silicon Tracker

d2σ((1S))

dpt times dy

N()

L times Δpt times Δy times ε

acctimes ε

trigtimes k

dimutimes k

trktimes k

qual

=

L Luminosity kdimu

local muon reconstructiony rapidity k

trk tracking

εacc

Acceptance kqual

track quality cuts ε

trig Trigger

00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε

acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027

εtrig

070 073 082k

dimu 085 088 095

ktrk

099 099 095 k

qual 085 085 093

Efficiencieshellip

Cross section

MC Data

pt(μ)

in GeV

0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6

η(μ) φ(μ)

06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV

Data vs Monte Carlo

To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once

Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with

masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23

free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3

Background 3rd order polynomial

All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV

m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV

0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18

PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV

00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb

06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb

12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb

00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb

Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)

Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)

σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)

Pythia

Comparison with previous results

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

ForwardPreshower detector

Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker

Solenoid Central Preshower detector

125 cm

50cm

20cm

DOslash tracking system

DOslash - Muon detectors

Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)

Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)

A-Scint

Forward Tracker (MDTs)

Shielding

Bottom BC Scint

PDTrsquosForward

Trigger Scint

Bottomonium production

Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on

boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD

factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)

color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models

Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions

Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted

ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary

vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states

(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection

- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and

Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV

Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash

Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV

Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements

EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026

VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020

The Analysis

Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges

0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection

Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system

pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the

Silicon Tracker

d2σ((1S))

dpt times dy

N()

L times Δpt times Δy times ε

acctimes ε

trigtimes k

dimutimes k

trktimes k

qual

=

L Luminosity kdimu

local muon reconstructiony rapidity k

trk tracking

εacc

Acceptance kqual

track quality cuts ε

trig Trigger

00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε

acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027

εtrig

070 073 082k

dimu 085 088 095

ktrk

099 099 095 k

qual 085 085 093

Efficiencieshellip

Cross section

MC Data

pt(μ)

in GeV

0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6

η(μ) φ(μ)

06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV

Data vs Monte Carlo

To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once

Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with

masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23

free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3

Background 3rd order polynomial

All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV

m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV

0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18

PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV

00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb

06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb

12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb

00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb

Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)

Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)

σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)

Pythia

Comparison with previous results

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

DOslash - Muon detectors

Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)

Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)

A-Scint

Forward Tracker (MDTs)

Shielding

Bottom BC Scint

PDTrsquosForward

Trigger Scint

Bottomonium production

Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on

boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD

factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)

color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models

Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions

Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted

ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary

vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states

(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection

- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and

Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV

Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash

Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV

Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements

EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026

VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020

The Analysis

Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges

0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection

Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system

pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the

Silicon Tracker

d2σ((1S))

dpt times dy

N()

L times Δpt times Δy times ε

acctimes ε

trigtimes k

dimutimes k

trktimes k

qual

=

L Luminosity kdimu

local muon reconstructiony rapidity k

trk tracking

εacc

Acceptance kqual

track quality cuts ε

trig Trigger

00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε

acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027

εtrig

070 073 082k

dimu 085 088 095

ktrk

099 099 095 k

qual 085 085 093

Efficiencieshellip

Cross section

MC Data

pt(μ)

in GeV

0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6

η(μ) φ(μ)

06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV

Data vs Monte Carlo

To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once

Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with

masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23

free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3

Background 3rd order polynomial

All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV

m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV

0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18

PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV

00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb

06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb

12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb

00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb

Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)

Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)

σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)

Pythia

Comparison with previous results

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Bottomonium production

Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on

boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD

factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)

color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models

Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions

Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted

ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary

vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states

(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection

- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and

Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV

Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash

Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV

Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements

EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026

VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020

The Analysis

Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges

0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection

Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system

pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the

Silicon Tracker

d2σ((1S))

dpt times dy

N()

L times Δpt times Δy times ε

acctimes ε

trigtimes k

dimutimes k

trktimes k

qual

=

L Luminosity kdimu

local muon reconstructiony rapidity k

trk tracking

εacc

Acceptance kqual

track quality cuts ε

trig Trigger

00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε

acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027

εtrig

070 073 082k

dimu 085 088 095

ktrk

099 099 095 k

qual 085 085 093

Efficiencieshellip

Cross section

MC Data

pt(μ)

in GeV

0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6

η(μ) φ(μ)

06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV

Data vs Monte Carlo

To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once

Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with

masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23

free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3

Background 3rd order polynomial

All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV

m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV

0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18

PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV

00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb

06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb

12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb

00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb

Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)

Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)

σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)

Pythia

Comparison with previous results

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash

Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV

Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements

EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026

VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020

The Analysis

Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges

0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection

Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system

pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the

Silicon Tracker

d2σ((1S))

dpt times dy

N()

L times Δpt times Δy times ε

acctimes ε

trigtimes k

dimutimes k

trktimes k

qual

=

L Luminosity kdimu

local muon reconstructiony rapidity k

trk tracking

εacc

Acceptance kqual

track quality cuts ε

trig Trigger

00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε

acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027

εtrig

070 073 082k

dimu 085 088 095

ktrk

099 099 095 k

qual 085 085 093

Efficiencieshellip

Cross section

MC Data

pt(μ)

in GeV

0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6

η(μ) φ(μ)

06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV

Data vs Monte Carlo

To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once

Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with

masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23

free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3

Background 3rd order polynomial

All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV

m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV

0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18

PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV

00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb

06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb

12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb

00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb

Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)

Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)

σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)

Pythia

Comparison with previous results

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

The Analysis

Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges

0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection

Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system

pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the

Silicon Tracker

d2σ((1S))

dpt times dy

N()

L times Δpt times Δy times ε

acctimes ε

trigtimes k

dimutimes k

trktimes k

qual

=

L Luminosity kdimu

local muon reconstructiony rapidity k

trk tracking

εacc

Acceptance kqual

track quality cuts ε

trig Trigger

00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε

acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027

εtrig

070 073 082k

dimu 085 088 095

ktrk

099 099 095 k

qual 085 085 093

Efficiencieshellip

Cross section

MC Data

pt(μ)

in GeV

0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6

η(μ) φ(μ)

06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV

Data vs Monte Carlo

To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once

Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with

masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23

free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3

Background 3rd order polynomial

All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV

m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV

0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18

PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV

00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb

06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb

12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb

00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb

Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)

Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)

σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)

Pythia

Comparison with previous results

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

d2σ((1S))

dpt times dy

N()

L times Δpt times Δy times ε

acctimes ε

trigtimes k

dimutimes k

trktimes k

qual

=

L Luminosity kdimu

local muon reconstructiony rapidity k

trk tracking

εacc

Acceptance kqual

track quality cuts ε

trig Trigger

00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε

acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027

εtrig

070 073 082k

dimu 085 088 095

ktrk

099 099 095 k

qual 085 085 093

Efficiencieshellip

Cross section

MC Data

pt(μ)

in GeV

0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6

η(μ) φ(μ)

06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV

Data vs Monte Carlo

To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once

Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with

masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23

free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3

Background 3rd order polynomial

All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV

m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV

0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18

PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV

00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb

06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb

12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb

00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb

Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)

Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)

σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)

Pythia

Comparison with previous results

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

MC Data

pt(μ)

in GeV

0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6

η(μ) φ(μ)

06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV

Data vs Monte Carlo

To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once

Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with

masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23

free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3

Background 3rd order polynomial

All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV

m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV

0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18

PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV

00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb

06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb

12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb

00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb

Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)

Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)

σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)

Pythia

Comparison with previous results

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with

masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23

free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3

Background 3rd order polynomial

All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV

m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV

0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18

PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV

00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb

06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb

12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb

00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb

Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)

Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)

σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)

Pythia

Comparison with previous results

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb

06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb

12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb

00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb

Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)

Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)

σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)

Pythia

Comparison with previous results

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)

Pythia

Comparison with previous results

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Effects of polarization

CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04

How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized

So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV

Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT

No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone

estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours

Better tracking resolution ---

CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances

rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our

statistical and systematic error

rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently

feasible without killing the signal

Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting

large number of correction factors

Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Conclusions

ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different

rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity

Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)

μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets

originating from heavy flavor

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Motivation

Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation

Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior

Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature

Problem ~1001 QCDbb

Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter

Fit to CDFqQCD calculation

CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038

Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

-tagged Jet Cross-section

Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be

N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)

T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)

fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)

L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section

tjPVTBBbb p

Nff

L

)(

Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated

p13

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

p14 Analysis Summary

Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)

Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon

(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven

determination of b-fraction

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

p14 Skimming

Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees

Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564

LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647

Bad Run Removed

p14 All Data CSG Skims

Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Trigger Turn On

bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson

ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)

Slope

PTurnOn t

e

EffF

1

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(

EfficiencyDetail Value

TTrigger Eff 1000

PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005

Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005

jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001

fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent

fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent

Efficiencieshellip

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets

Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable

Independent variable

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PPI

2

) wo()w ( tt PPI

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets

μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos

rArr offset -- correction needed

Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)

Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038

Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

) wo()w (

) wo()w (2

tt

tt

PP

PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

2

) wo()w ( tt PP

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Energy Resolution

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

resolution

Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ

take rms of order randomized imbalance

Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)

resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)

Fit

N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01

Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo

2

222

CP

S

P

N

P ttt

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

)e

2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

sp

t

i

y

xx

dpdpepNy

tmti

i

t

Fitting Functions

18

02

2

12

2

)(2

0

2

1

2

)

e 2

1

(

2

2

2

1

i i

ii

tmt

ppx

x

s

j

k

pN

i

y

xx

dpdpe

y

tmti

i

j

tj

Variable Value Error

N1 762 032

k1 1690 126

N2 328 060

k2 3633 323

Variable Value Error

N 956 times 107 17 times 106

3195 0004

561 004

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Extraction of Correction Factors

281418

96172

dof

151318

33172

dof

exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Point by Point Unsmearing Factors

Smeared

UnsmearedR

Unsmearing Error

-150

-100

-50

00

50

100

150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Jet Pt (GeV)

D

evia

nce

Exponential

ldquonormalrdquo

Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample

Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)

Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt

Fit with A + B e-PtC

A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)

From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)

Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction

This is effectively the NLO k factor

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc

Conc

DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent

effect)

JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics

• Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
• Outline
• Tevatron ndash data taking
• Slide 4
• Recent developments
• Open Heavy Flavor Production
• Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
• The DOslash Detector
• Slide 9
• Slide 10
• DOslash tracking system
• DOslash - Muon detectors
• Bottomonium production
• Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
• The Analysis
• Efficiencieshellip
• Data vs Monte Carlo
• Fitting the Signal
• Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
• Comparison with previous results
• Effects of polarization
• Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
• Conclusions
• Motivation
• m-tagged Jet Cross-section
• p14 Analysis Summary
• p14 Skimming
• p14 All Data CSG Skims
• Trigger Turn On
• Efficiencieshellip
• m JES Definitions
• Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
• Energy Resolution
• resolution
• Fitting Functions
• Extraction of Correction Factors
• Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
• HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
• Slide 39
• Conc