Banner
    If That Were A Higgs At 200 GeV...
    By Tommaso Dorigo | December 23rd 2010 12:56 AM | 18 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
    About Tommaso

    I am an experimental particle physicist working with the CMS experiment at CERN. In my spare time I play chess, abuse the piano, and aim my dobson...

    View Tommaso's Profile
    A reader of this blog asked in the comments thread of a recent piece the following interesting question:

    "Assuming mH = 201 GeV/c2, how many Higgses shoud have been produced at
    the Tevatron by now with an integated luminosity of 10 inverse
    femtobarns? And how many H -> ZZ -> µµµµ would one expect to see?"

    The question was triggered by two facts, if I read correctly between the lines. The first is the observation, by the CMS collaboration, of a quite spectacular event with two Z bosons decaying to muon pairs (you can read about the event, and see several event displays, at this link).  The second is an interview to the CMS Spokesperson, Guido Tonelli, who was broadcast by the Italian newspaper "Il Corriere della Sera". The accompanying newspaper article could not be restrained into less prosaic claims than "the LHC is seeing the origin of the Universe" and similar overhypings. Oh well, we know how the press works.

    The question by our reader, however, is more meaningful: Okay, maybe this is not a Higgs decay (the chance that it is due to simple production of two Z bosons together is way higher, even if the Higgs boson exists). But let's see anyway what comes up for the Tevatron experiments in the same final state. Would CDF and DZERO have seen more such events in case the Higgs was there, at 201 GeV ?

    At the Tevatron, the total cross section for H production is about 247 femtobarns, as you gather from table 1 in this paper, for instance (I apologize for picking an experimental reference to quote a theoretically-computed number; but the link is actually quite informative). This means that in 10/fb one experiment would have got N(H) = 2470 produced Higgs bosons, in total.

    At 200 GeV the H-->ZZ branching fraction is B(H->ZZ) = 0.2533 (also in table 1 of the reference above). On the other hand, the Z branching fraction into dimuon pairs is B(Z->mm)=0.03366 (see here). So the production times branching fraction is then N(mmmm) = N(H) x B(H->ZZ) x B(Z->mm)^2 = 0.709 events.

    Now, you should be aware that most of these events will not leave a completely reconstructed signal in the detector. Both CDF and DZERO see muons in a central rapidity interval, which means that they do not cover the full solid angle. Let us say that the total coverage amounts
    to 80% (an educated guess), and let us also say that in that region the detectors "see" 90%
    of the muons from Z decay (another educated guess). These are rough numbers, and of course one cannot make detailed calculations on a piece of paper: one really needs to run a simulation which correctly describes the angular distribution of the decay products, etcetera etcetera. In any case, approximating is the art of the experimental physicist, so let us proceed. You want to see all four muons: this is possible only in a fraction of times equal to 0.8^4 x 0.9^4 = 0.27. This means that CDF, or DZERO, might expect to detect 0.709x0.27= roughly 0.2 events of that kind in 10/fb.


    Now please note that the experiments have not yet analyzed such amount of data - they have collected less than 10/fb, due to downtimes etcetera, and they are currently analyzing datasets of about 7/fb each. In such data they expect about 0.15 events if the Higgs has
    that mass.

    Now please also note that the standard model production of ZZ pairs has a cross section which is about 1.5 picobarns. This is roughly 23 times larger a number than the production cross section of H->ZZ events (247 fb x 0.2533). So you get two things. First, that in 7/fb our back-of-the-envelope calculation predicts that from SM we expect to see roughly 23x0.15=3 four-muon events. Second, that there is no chance to detect a Higgs boson there in this final state.

    Incidentally, a search for 4-lepton decays of ZZ pairs was performed by CDF in 4.8/fb of data last year -so two-thirds of the 7/fb I was basing my estimate on. They looked for both electron and muon final states, and observed 5 ZZ candidates, as shown in the figure on the right. Our back-of-the-envelope calculation is not too bad! In fact, 4.8 is 2/3 of 7, but considering that they use both eeee, eemm, and mmmm final states (all in all a 4 times larger branching fraction, since the eemm final state has double probability due to the combinatorial factor), our estimate should have been 3 events x 2/3 x 4= 8 events.

    Another note: the figure on the right shows the total invariant mass of the four leptons in the events found by CDF. Backgrounds to the ZZ final state hypothesis total less than a tenth of one event, so these really are clean ZZ candidates. The mass of three of them is close to the threshold, 180 GeV or little more; but two candidates have a mass very close to each other, about 325 GeV (to be precise, one is at 324.8, the other at 325.0 GeV!). You might not notice those two, since they are plotted with blue asterisks, quite unconventional if you ask me... Even more unconventional is the weird choice of having a separate binning for data and MC predictions!! Oh well...

    Let me finally tell you how probable it is that at least one H->ZZ->4m event has shown up in either CDF or DZERO or both, in 7/fb of data. We expect 0.15 events in each experiment: this makes the average 0.3 in total. The probability to observe at least one event of that kind, if the expected value is 0.3, is calculated with an integral of the Poisson distribution of mean mu=0.3, from 1 to infinity. This amounts to 1-exp(-mu)=26%.

    Comments

    And at the LHC, with 50 pb-1?

    Vladimir Kalitvianski
    > how many H -> ZZ -> µµµµ would one expect to see?

    Is it a unique translation from English to Greek?
    Sorry, Vladimir, I meant to say in a short way:

    how many Events where the produced Higgs boson H decays into a pair of neutral Z-bosons which in turn each decay into a muon pair (µ+ µ- that is) would one expect to see.

    Vladimir Kalitvianski
    Aah! And I thought you meant  pp-->H-->ZZ-->µµµµ.
    Vladimir, I don't see your point.

    btw I wound not write pp-->H, firstly because at the Tevatron there are actually protons colliding with antiprotons, and secondly because the Higgs is produced via various constituent subprocesses (see the paper referred to by Tommaso above: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1007/1007.4587v1.pdf)

    Vladimir Kalitvianski
    Oh, those µµµµ contain also anti-µ, don't they?

    I just wonder if H-->ZZ is the only mechanism for creating ZZ pairs? Can ZZ be created otherwise?
    yes, that cryptic µµµµ more precisely means (µ+ µ-) (µ+ µ-) ...

    and sure enuogh H-->ZZ is not the only mechanism for creating ZZ pairs: Now please also note that the standard model production of ZZ pairs has a cross section which is about 1.5 picobarns. as Tommaso writes above.

    Vladimir Kalitvianski
    Probably the electromagnetic mechanism cross section pp --> pp + µµµµ is even smaller.
    dorigo
    Even smaller ? For two muon pairs of mass around MZ, the cross section you are referring to (exclusive, diffractive production of ZZ pairs in pp collisions) is probably of a thousandth of a femtobarn. For some discussion of exclusive production processes, see other posts in this blog, for instance
    http://www.science20.com/quantum_diaries_survivor/plot_week_exclusive_diagrams

    Cheers,
    T.

    Vladimir Kalitvianski
    That's what I say - probably...
    Very instructive post, Tommaso. Thank you!

    Hi there,
    the real interesting question in my opinion is:
    suppose the CMS event is really due to H -> ZZ -> mu mu mu mu, corresponding to a theory beyond the
    SM, how many events should the Tevatron have seen? Or in other words, to which extend can the Tevatron
    exclude such models via the non-observation of an excess?

    dorigo
    Hi Sven,

    it is a good question. However there is, IMO, a starting methodological problem in this line of reasoning. If we spend our time discussing "what ifs" based on that one event, we should account for the fact that we might have been equally "surprised" to see many other things. Of course one cannot discuss the universe of possibilities, but restricting to ZZ events, one could have seen a 4-electron event, or a 2-e 2-m event just as well. So one must start with comparing the 1-observed event with a background from the three channels combined. This is already neglecting the other possible universes in which we would be discussing other signals. But it is okay to do. So, in 35/pb at 7 TeV, the expected number of 4-lepton ZZ candidates seen by CMS should be of the order of some tenths of an event.

    Let me elaborate. The total SM xs is 6 pb, and we can take an overall 4-lepton BR of 4x0.036^2=0.5%. This makes them 35x6x0.005=0.75, or about 0.4 detectable, roughly.

    Let us say 0.4, although it is a rough estimate. Now, what we can do is to say that the "remaining" 0.6 events may be due to H->ZZ->4l. In that case, the cross section for this "anomalous" Higgs production would be of the order of 150% that of ZZ production, times 4. The factor of 4 comes from the BR of the H->ZZ decay for MH=200 GeV (0.25). So we are talking about a production cross section of about 6 times that of SM ZZ, or 36 picobarns.

    I believe that at the Tevatron such a Higgs would have a cross section of the order of 4 times smaller. So 9 picobarns. Now, the ZZ cross section has been measured there with both 4-lepton and 2l-2nu final states, and it is 1.5 picobarns with errors of the order of 0.6 picobarns.

    It follows that such an object is clearly excluded.

    Cheers,
    T.


    The appearance of a 325 GeV mass in this "Higgs" search of CDF is bizarre given the new paper of D0 today - see my blog - that reports something like a 3-sigma excess of a 325 GeV fourth-generation "top prime quark", as it decays to W+jets (the excess is only seen if W goes to a muon, not electron).

    Is there any way how those could come from the same 325 GeV particle? A Higgs is clearly very different from a top prime quark.

    dorigo
    Hi Lubos,

    thanks for the link and for the info - I had not seen the dzero analysis (still have to read it).

    Anyway, your question. A H-->ZZ-->4 lepton at 325 GeV is of course already quite strange, and it would be even stranger if there was a crowding of new particles at that mass. I am not the best person to ask, but I would say there is hardly any way to have a t' and a H at the same mass. And the t' as is seen is a fermion, which cannot possibly produce two bosons in its decay... One would have to hypothesize very exotic setups, like a mass degeneracy between a multiplet of heavy charged fermions and one of superpartners. I leave it to theorists with feet off the ground.

    Cheers,
    T.

    lumidek
    Interestingly sensible answer, Tommaso. But is that really right that the experimenters are always in full control of the Bose/Einstein statistics of the new particles? I have heard otherwise. After all, can you distinguish a jet from a fermionic quark and a bosonic gluon? A mere counting of particles can't be guaranteed to work because neutrinos - fermions - may leave the interaction, can't they?
    dorigo
    Hm, experimentally it is indeed not possible except very few cases. Deep down this thread I can disclose that I participated in the first measurement of Bose-Einstein correlations of pions in CMS last year. Other cases are harder -BE correlations of kaons and a few other mesons have also been reported, but these are few cases where a real phenomenological effect is shown which refers to the spin-statistics features of the produced or decaying body.
    More in general, of course exclusive decays provide a unequivocal assignment, but for jets it is not possible. What you can do is connected with the charge, not with the spin (the jet charge algorithm can distinguish q/g, albeit only on a statistical basis).
    As for more interesting thoughts - the Higgs at 115 GeV has a lifetime which allows it to travel a few femtometers, which is just the right order of magnitude for the formation of quantum interference effects from bose-einstein correlations. If you imagine producing a Higgs, and then letting it decay to, say, two photons, you might find that the two decay photons could enhance the coherent production of photons from the primary interaction vertex. One could thus think of exploiting this feature for the selection of Higgs events. Unfortunately, the enhancement is just a factor of two in total probability at most, and further, the two photons from the Higgs should be close in phase space with additional photons... the phase space is very small, so this is just one instance of a nice idea that does not work.

    Cheers,
    T.
    lumidek
    Tx, Tommaso.