Banner
By Tommaso Dorigo | December 18th 2009 07:31 AM | 9 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
About Tommaso

I am an experimental particle physicist working with the CMS experiment at CERN and the CDF experiment at Fermilab. In my spare time I play chess...

View Tommaso's Profile
This morning LHC machinists, experimentalists from the LHC experiments, as well as other CERN personnel gathered in the Main Auditorium at CERN to give their end-of-year report. After a LHC status report the spokespersons of ALICE, ATLAS, CMS, LHCB, and TOTEM briefly flashed their first experimental results, obtained from 900 GeV and 2.36 TeV collisions acquired in the course of the last three weeks.

The amount of results that the collaborations have managed to produce in such a small time frame, and from a relatively small amount of collisions, is really astonishing. Of course most of them have no real scientific value, if as a yardstick you use the advancement of our knowledge of particle physics. Yet everybody was eager to know how well the performance of the detectors matches the expectations from computer simulations, and the answer is that all experiments are performing impressively, and that almost everything is understood to a level of detail I myself would have thought improbable to achieve in such a short time frame, just a few weeks ago. But then the first data came, and I saw with my own eyes the quality of the thing we have put together. As a simple starter, have a look at the CMS signal of neutral pions in their decay to photon pairs (a final state of interest for low-mass Higgs boson searches, although at an energy three orders of magnitude larger!). The black points in the histogram below are 900 GeV data, the blue line is the fit including the signal, and the red dashes show the background fit.



I was especially pleased to see that the effort of the small group of physicists from Padova and Cyprus which my colleague Franco and I have managed to put together has not been vain. We have been working day and night in the last two weeks, in order to produce an approved signal of the  meson. The is a electrically neutral hadron, composed of a strange-antistrange quark pair. It is a very well-known particle; it was discovered in the fifties and we know everything about it, but it is worthwhile to search its decay: it is a very good calibration line on which to test the detector performance, for a couple of reasons.

Some background on the Phi meson

To explain those reasons, I need to give you some background. We reconstruct phi meson decays in two charged kaons, as in . This is the dominant decay mode of the particle -it occurs about 50% of the times- and it is mediated by strong interactions: the strength of the interaction guarantees that it takes place in a time so short that the  has no time to leave the interaction point where it has been created.

Strong interactions are incapable of turning a quark into one of a different species, so the two strange quarks manage to survive inside the kaon daughters. You see that in the sketch on the right (read it from the left to the right, as if time went rightward): strong interactions "fish" a up-antiup-quark pair from the vacuum, and you get two light strange mesons at the price of a heavy hidden-strangeness one. The dashed line is a gluon, which transmits colour charge and momentum to the final state, mediating the decay.

Now, the mass of the  meson equals 1019.4 MeV, which is just a little bit more than twice the mass of the charged kaons (493.7 MeV). With so little extra energy to impart to the daughters, the disintegration pictured above is highly suppressed. This has the consequence that the decay, while "instantaneous", is not as much so as other strong-mediated ones. The particle has enough time after its production in the proton-proton collision to "resonate" at a well-defined mass: in other words, the strange-antistrange quark pair can reach a well-defined orbit inside the particle, giving it a well-defined mass. So its natural width is unusually small for a strong-decaying hadron, 4.26 MeV.

As for the charged kaons, they live long enough to often cross the entire tracking volume of CMS. They get reconstructed as nice helices in the solenoidal magnetic field, thanks to the small energy they deposit in each of the 13 layers of 300-micron-thick silicon detectors they traverse. Now, it turns out that the energy measured by the silicon layers is a distinguishing feature, which can tell apart different charged particles. You can see it in the figure on the left, which shows how different particles have a different behaviour of deposited energy (on the y axis) which is a unique function of the particle's momentum (the quantity shown on the horizontal axis). The figure is from ALICE (which does not use silicon for this measurement, but the physics is the same), and it is one of the results shown today. I decided to show the ALICE result because in this case it is much better than the CMS or ATLAS plots! ALICE has been designed to excel in the particle identification using the energy release of charged particles, because of its need to study very high-multiplicity events caused by heavy ion collisions.

Reasons why we need to study the phi resonance

So let us take stock. Here are a few reasons to study the  meson:

1- The  decays without leaving the interaction point, so its decay products constitute a representative sample of so-called "prompt tracks", ones on which to start studying things such as the resolution on the trajectory: since we know where the particles have originated, we have a handle to study the precision of our track reconstruction.
2- The  decays to two kaons: these particles have a quite distinctive energy loss in the silicon, and so  decays allow us to verify in detail and tune our algorithms that exploit that characteristic feature.
3- A pure sample of kaons -which we can select as the two "legs" of the signal- is also a crucial tool with which to study the characteristics of so-called "decays in flight" of kaons to muon-neutrino pairs. When the charged kaon decays (), it produces a honest-to-god muon, and we want to use muons as probes of rare, exotic processes, so we have better understand very well how to distinguish these "decay-in-flight" muons from ones produced by the decay of a more exotic object. This is possible because the decay  yields a charged track which has lower momentum than its parent, and the two helices (that of the kaon and that of the muon) may be reconstructed as a single one, but this helix will show odd characteristics, such as large fit chisquared or large impact parameter. So  decays open us a door to a fruitful study of these peculiarities.
4- The , finally, is a background-ridden signal, not easy to extract from high-energy interactions at the LHC. Finding that particle, and comparing to computer simulations the observed background and signal, is an important step in our learning curve.

The phi signal in early data

Now, I will not spend much time describing the frantic days that have populated the last two weeks of my life. Suffices to say that I have worked about 50% more than what I usually do, or twice as much as I would like to, or three times as much as what I am paid for. A summary of the last week at CERN already exists in this column -I have described it without making reference to the signal I was searching for, because it was not approved material yet.

The Ph.D. student I am co-advising, Luca, can complain further in the comments section if he likes; the same can be said of the undergraduate who also works with us, Pierluigi, and of the post-doc from Cyprus University, Mario. All these folks have lost significant amounts of sleep to put together the single figure I am posting today. Science is tough!

The histogram below shows the mass distribution of opposite-charge pairs of particles reconstructed in the CMS silicon tracker. The tracks have been selected by enforcing the characteristics we expect for kaons produced in  decays: they have helices passing through the interaction point, and have produced energy deposits in the silicon compatible with that expected for kaons. The small bump you observe in the data at about 1019 MeV of mass is due to about a tousand decays of  mesons. The fit returns a reconstructed mass in perfect agreement with book values, and the width is also in great agreement with expectations.



In the next weeks we will use the data collected by CMS so far (about 400 thousand good events at 900 GeV, plus a few tens of thousands at 2.36 TeV) for a preliminary estimate of the probability of kaons, pions, and protons yielding muon tracks, using the , as well as the  and the  signals shown below. We will also start using the  resonances to study the resolution in the impact parameter of tracks (the impact parameter is the distance of closest approach of the helix of a track from the interaction point) as well as many other characteristics of our reconstructed tracks. It will be exciting!



LHC is finally on, and we mean business!

Comments

rholley
First, a loud HUZZAH!

Second, for readers who like myself weigh things in barleycorns rather than MeV/c2, the phi meson's mass is about 8.6% greater than that of the proton.

And now the main thing - the resonance.  The reason for long life (for a strong decaying hadron) makes rings a bell in my brain and reminds me of these beautifully tuned microresonators.  Lots of beautiful physics in that article, if you aren't put off at the beginning by those smelly socks!

Robert H. Olley
Physics Department
University of Reading
England

Ciao Tommaso,

bravo and congratulations to you and your team on completing the φ reconstruction and having it shown in the seminar yesterday. My team worked just as hard on inclusive muon signals, and produced some very nice results - alas they were not selected for public display. Thus I cannot write about them, not brag about my group, as I would like to - this is also part of the scientific world in which we operate.

You hold up the φ decay as a way to study fake muons coming from charged kaons, but I'm pretty sure this won't work. Your φ signal is small compared to the background, even after you apply your dE/dX cuts - your certainty that your charged tracks are kaons is too low. The Ks signal is much more useful, albeit for &pi# rather than kaon decays.

Finally, it is interesting to compare your φ signal to the one reported by ALICE. Your peak is narrower, and by eye the signal-to-noise appears to be about the same as what ALICE obtained. But it is not clear whether ALICE made use of their particle identification capability, which is much better than ours (CMS), as you pointed out.

The fun has begun!

regards,
Michael

dorigo
Hi Michael,

sure, the phi is background-ridden. The signal to noise in the signal region is of the order of one to six. Now, while of course fake rates of muons can be studied with other tools, the phi is important, and we in fact have been studying for a while all the tools we have to determine these with the data.

While I understand your skepticism, I can put together a simple argument to show that there is good information to extract. Take a sample a thousand times larger than the one we have now (okay, now there is no trigger and next year there will be one, but phi mesons can be sought anywhere, and getting O(1B) events will not be hard). In it, there are a million phi decays, or two million kaon tracks from peak events, with a S/N of 1/6. With some simple math, one may demonstrate that a fake rate K->mu of one percent can be estimated with a relative uncertainty of two percent, such as f=0.01 +- 0.0002. Although there are some systematics due to the sidebands subtraction method, this is still a valuable number to derive, with a very simple, solid technique.

But of course you are right, there are better ways. One can tune the Monte Carlo by comparing it to the data on the fake rate measured in K->pi pi decays, which is much cleaner.  Indeed, we wll do that too... In the post above I wanted to be didactical so I did not go this much into the nitty-gritty.

Cheers,
T.

Tommaso,

This post does not appear as the first one in your main blog page! The one about MET is still there as the latest post.

dorigo
Desole. I hope Hank and his crew may fix this glitch for good, it's been around for too long now.
Cheers,
T.

I'm quite proud that "my" dE/dx (in collaboration with other people, of course) has been used to reinforce the evidence for light resonances on the very first data. Here you chose not to show the same plot with the complementary kaon-id cut, which demonstrates that your nice peak disappears as soon as you exit from the kaon band: I think that that plot was the key element to convince everybody at the last approval session that you had really found a resonance and it was not a spurious effect (e.g., misreconstructed photon conversions as somebody suggested).
We also applied our dE/dx-based particle id on the Lambda decay products, to confirm that they were really pπ, but it was much less crucial: the peak, as you show, was already impressive enough that nobody expected a different outcome. Your Phi hunt instead really provided the best use case for dE/dx in these days; thank you, because we would have absolutely never thought about that before you contacted us :)

Is time-of-flight info in the silicon precise enough to be of any use in separating from pions?

Hi anonymous, in silicon we measure dE/dx and not the time of flight. The dE/dx at low momentum, although very far from being as good in silicon as in a TPC (this is why Tommaso preferred to show the ALICE plot for his educational purposes), is sufficient to separate kaons from pions. But we are talking about collision products whose average momentum is <1 GeV...
(Unfortunately this will be of no use for helping the identification of B and D mesons by their daughter kaons.)
We also measure time of flight, but with the calorimeters and the muon detectors. Unfortunately there is a minimum pT needed just to reach them, due to the high magnetic field, and they are not useful for identifying kaons and protons since, again, at high momentum this would require a fantastic precision.
On the other hand, both dE/dx and time of flight can and will be used to search for new exotic charged particles with high mass and produced with high momentum, if their lifetime is sufficiently long to traverse the detector (and many theorists argue for the possible existence of such a particle, inaccessible so far because of its mass).

dorigo
Hi Andrea,
thank you and the Louvain group for the fit to the dE/dx - in fact we would have had a much harder time extracting the signal without it. You are being acknowledged in the analysis note I am presently writing.
Cheers,
T.

Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite><TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.