search for a charged higgs in h + cs using 4.7 fb -1
Post on 26-Jan-2016
17 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
A. MartyniukA. Martyniukaa, P. Miyagawa, P. Miyagawabb, M. Owen, M. Owencc, O. , O. TrifisTrifiscc, V. Chavda, V. Chavdacc, and U.K. Yang, and U.K. Yangcc
a: a: University of VictoriaUniversity of Victoriab: b: University of SheffieldUniversity of Sheffield
c: c: University of ManchesterUniversity of Manchester
Higgs Meeting, August 27, 2012Higgs Meeting, August 27, 2012
1
Thanks to the Editorial Board: Michel Vetterli (Chair)Martin zur Nedden, Wouter Verkerke, James Ferrando
A charged Higgs boson is predicted by the Beyond SM: Two Higgs Doublet Model: H0, h0, A0, H±
Charged Higgs productions from top quark decays Huge top production, focus on H H++cs cs at low tan Complementary to HH++at high tan
2
ν
W+
W/H-
b-jet
b-jet
jet
jet
t
e/
t
Dijet mass 2 fitter Semi-leptonic tt sample
3
ν
W+
W/H-
b-jet
b-jet
jet
jet
t
e/
t
Likelihood Fit, Br(tH+b): Discovery or 95% Limits
Previous analysis with 35 pb-1 data (≥ 1 b-tag), comparable to the Tevatron limits ( ATL-CONF-2011-127, ATL-COM-PHYS-2011-130)
Updated analysis with 4.7 pb-1 (2011 full data) High-pt lepton with 4 jets (at least 2 b-tag)
Single lepton trigger samples Use the Top group selection cuts and have a good agreement Lep Pt>25 (e), 20 (m), Jet Pt>25, MET> 35(e), 20(m), MV1 w>0.6 The list of the full event selections cuts is in the backup slide
Supporting document ATL-COM-PHYS-2012-660
The updated analysis has a conditional approval in June, 2012 Issues with systematic Issues with fit stability
4
A dijet mass 2 fitter: lepton plus 4 jets Improved the dijet mass dist. by reconstructing whole ttbar event Constrain W(e/m) and top quarks masses to be the PDG values, by
floating jet/lepton energy within their resolutions The 5th jet can be replaced as a W daughter jets with any of the two
untagged 3rd, 4th jets Remove poorly reconstructed events with 2<10
5Before Fitting After Fitting
Signals and background templates
Seven H+ signal templates from 90 to 150 GeV by 10 GeV step
SM ttbar template
Non-ttbar template (10%): Single top, W/Z+jets, QCD, and diboson
Set limits on the branching ratio to charged Higgs boson using the frequentic procedure
A likelihood function is define as
where ni: observed events, i: expected events in each bin
Limits are calculated on a test Statistics qb based on a profile Likelihood ratio
7
The exp. events of ttbar bkg and H+ signal as BR(tH+b)
Missing contributions in the limits b-JES/c-JES syst. Mtop syst. Updated Stop t-ch. norm
Implementation of the syst. band in the kinematic distributions
Check the output nuisance parameters and their correlations
(N-1) limits to show the syst. effect of each item
Limits without a constraint on the (ttbar)
8
Limits presented in the approval meeting in June
Raised in the Higgs Approval meeting and by the Edboard
9
Missing syst. contributions (b-/c-JES, Mtop, proper Stop t-ch. norm.) are included. Their contributions are small (done)
After ICHEP deadline passed, we decided to update our analysis• Use the most updated JES calibration and it’s uncertainty ( tag 00-05-09): lower eff. for Njet>=4 cut• Use the updated luminosity with small error: 4.66 /fb with 1.8% (old:
4.71/fb with 3.4%) no change in the data, but the bkgd prediction based on the MC is reduced by 1.2%
10
Implementation of the syst. band the kinematic distributions (done) Check the output nuisance parameters and their correlations (done) Limits without a constraint on the (ttbar) (done) (N-1) limits to show the syst. effect of each item (done)
11
oldnew
data
SMttbar
old
new
12
13
The fit results are consistent with null Higgs hypothesis
14
Stat. Only
15
mH=90 GeV mH=110 GeV
The effect of the individual syst.?
The only one syst. Item is removed in the fit, “(N-1)” limit Basically, the (N-1) limits are close to the N limits due to the
correlations with other parameters
16
17
Groups of the correlated systematic JES, Mtop, bJES: c bTag, (ttbar) Gen, I/FSR, PS and JER
mH=90 GeV
18
A group of the correlated parameters (x) is removed in the fit to check the effect of their syst. on the limits
The (N-x) limits look reasonable
In the current fit,(ttbar) is constrained with +7%/-9% uncertainties
What if we remove this constraint? basically 2 parameter fitting: Br(tH+b) and (ttbar) The limits are not changed The resulting cross sections are consistent with the SM
19
The full 2011 data (4.7 fb-1) have been analyzed to search for a charged Higgs from top quark decays.
The results are consistent with null Higgs hypothesis The 95% limits on Br(tH+b) are set between 5% to 1%,
depending mHare improved by a factor of 5 to 10, with respect to the current best limits in csbar channel
The limits, equivalent to the limits from the three combined tau channels.
We plan to publish these results
20
21
Semi-leptonic channel: e/ plus at least 4 jets (2 b-tag) Use the Top group selection cuts and have full agreement:
acceptance challenge Cuts are:
One el with ET > 25 GeV & |η| < 2.47, with a veto (1.37 < |η| < 1.52), OR one mu with pT > 20 GeV and |η| < 2.5 with single lepton triggers (EF_e20_medium,EF_e22_medium, EF_mu18, EF_mu18_medium)
Remove events tagged as e-mu overlap Require a primary vertex with at least five tracks MET > 35 GeV (el), OR MET > 20 GeV (mu) Mt(W) > 25 GeV (el) OR MET + Mt(W) > 60 GeV (mu)
≥ 4 jets with ET > 25 GeV and |η| < 2.5 and |JVF|>0.75
Events with loose bad jets with pT > 20 GeV are rejected ≥ 2 jet tagged with MV1 weight > 0.601713
22
SM ttbar (~90% of the total bkgd) Use MC@NLO sample for shape and normalization with NNLO cross
section W+jets, Wbb/cc+jets, Wc+jets (~3.6% of the total bkgd)
Use ALPGEN interfaced with Herwig samples for shape and normalization
Normalized with K*cross sections plus the SFs derived from the Top W+jets group based on the W+/W- charge asymmetry in the data
Single top (~3.7% of the total bkgd) Use MC@NLO sample for Wt and s-channel, but AcerMC for t-channel
normalized with NNLO cross section (also shape) Multi-jets (~2.5% of the total bkgd)
Use anti-electron data-driven method provided by the Top fake group (normalization)
23
24
Powheg plus Herwig vs Pythia? With Pythia AMTB1 tune: 11% difference in acceptance, disfavored
by the jet shape data. New PS syt. with Pythia Perugia 2011 C tune:3% difference in acceptance
The effect due to the PS on the limit is very minimal.
Pythia AMBT1 tune Pythia Perugia 2011 C tune
top related