Dimuon scouting update N. Amin, C. Campagnari, V. Krutelyov, M. - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
dimuon scouting update
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Dimuon scouting update N. Amin, C. Campagnari, V. Krutelyov, M. - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Mar 20, 2024 125 likes •267 views

Dimuon scouting update N. Amin, C. Campagnari, V. Krutelyov, M. Masciovecchio, U. Sarica, I. Suarez, A. Yagil January 9, 2020 Overview of progress/baseline Previous update Baseline selections Exactly 2 OS muons and 1 DV in collections, then

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Dimuon scouting update

  • N. Amin, C. Campagnari, V. Krutelyov,
  • M. Masciovecchio, U. Sarica, I. Suarez, A. Yagil

January 9, 2020

slide-2
SLIDE 2

⚫ Previous update ⚫ Reminder of baseline selections →

  • Note: took out "Num. muon system hits

> 0" because it turns out nMatchedStations is hardcoded to 0 (https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/ blob/CMSSW_9_2_10/HLTrigger/Muon/ src/ HLTScoutingMuonProducer.cc#L161), and nValidMuonHits is also always 0, during 2017 data-taking

⚫ In the following slides

  • Follow-up on 𝛦𝜃/𝛦𝜚 variable
  • Signal information
  • Some 2017 and 2018 data comparisons
  • Synchronization exercise

Overview of progress/baseline

2

Baseline selections

Exactly 2 OS muons and 1 DV in collections, then

  • DV
  • (x, y, z) errors < (0.05, 0.05, 0.1) cm
  • chi2/ndof < 5
  • 𝜍 < 11 cm
  • Muon (pT > 3 GeV, |𝜃| < 2.4)
  • ID
  • Num. tracker layers with meas. > 5
  • chi2/ndof < 3
  • Isolation
  • Track isolation < 0.1
  • 𝛦R with closest jet > 0.3
  • Dimuon kinematics
  • cos(𝛦𝜚(dimuon, DV vector)) > 0
  • |𝛦𝜚(muon 1, muon 2)| < 2.8
  • |𝛦𝜚(dimuon, DV vector)| < 0.02

2018 trigger seeds

L1 — OR of

  • DoubleMu4p5_SQ_OS_dR_Max1p2
  • DoubleMu0er1p4_SQ_OS_dR_Max1p4
  • DoubleMu_15_7
slide-3
SLIDE 3

Followup on 𝛦𝜃12/𝛦𝜚12

3

⚫ Background tracks from PV are characterized by large values of

log10(abs(𝛦𝜃12/𝛦𝜚12)) between the two muons

⚫ Proposed a cut to reject events with logabsetaphi>2.0 ⚫ This is pretty independent of signal kinematics (flat ~0.7% efficiency

loss), so it does not induce mass-sculpting

10

slide-4
SLIDE 4

⚫ We are able to successfully run on your signal in

  • root://cmseos.fnal.gov//store/user/hroutray/DirectGluonFusion_PhiToMuMu/

ggPhimumu_Phimass2_Phictau0_5_part1

⚫ If it is useful, we have put some signal with a H→ZdZd→2𝜈+2X model in

  • env -i gfal-ls -lH root://redirector.t2.ucsd.edu//store/user/namin/ProjectMetis/

HToZdZdTo2Mu2X_params_mzd20_ctau50mm_RAWSIM_v9/

  • mzd can be replaced with {2, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20} GeV, ctau with {1, 5,

10, 25, 50} mm (30 points in total)

  • Generated with 2018 MC configuration

Signals

4

slide-5
SLIDE 5

⚫ The DoubleMu4 L1 seed was active/unprescaled for only 75% of

2018 data-taking

⚫ In subsequent slides, use the two separate ORs listed below

2017 vs 2018: triggers

5

2018 trigger seeds

L1 — OR of

  • DoubleMu4p5_SQ_OS_dR_Max1p2
  • DoubleMu0er1p4_SQ_OS_dR_Max1p4
  • DoubleMu_15_7

2017 trigger seeds

L1 — OR of

  • DoubleMu4_SQ_OS_dR_Max1p2
  • DoubleMu0er1p4_SQ_OS_dR_Max1p4
  • DoubleMu_15_7
slide-6
SLIDE 6

⚫ Compare key variables for small subsets of data in eras 2017D and 2018C after the baseline

selection with relaxed isolation

  • More plots here

2017 vs 2018: kinematics

6 leading muon pT dimuon mass subleading muon pT DV 𝜍 log10(abs(𝛦𝜃12/𝛦𝜚12))

slide-7
SLIDE 7

⚫ Subleading muon track isolation shown below for all masses

(left) and for mass > 5 GeV (right)

⚫ Consistent track isolation quantities between the two years

2017 vs 2018: isolation

7

slide-8
SLIDE 8 ⚫ Propose a synchronization exercise to agree on a selection and have consistency

in calculation of a few variables

  • E.g., what displacement variable to use, and how is it corrected?
⚫ One file from 2017D: /store/data/Run2017D/ScoutingCaloMuon/RAW/

v1/000/302/033/00000/9C0FCC26-8B8D-E711-8A1F-02163E01273D.root

  • Lumis: {"302033": [[1, 39]]} (in golden json, ~5pb-1)
  • ~3.2M events in the file
  • ~400k events when requiring ≥1 DV, ≥2 muons)
  • ~7k events with baseline requirements on the right
⚫ Make baseline selection on right and dump table of relevant quantities to
  • compare. Some details:
  • DV_rhoCorr: DV 𝜍 corrected wrt beamspot
  • lxy: Lxy, corrected wrt first PV
  • Muon1_pt, Muon1_eta, …: muons pT-ordered
  • absdphimumu: |𝛦𝜚(muon1, muon2)|
  • absdphimudv: |𝛦𝜚(dimuon, DV vector)|
  • logabsetaphi: log10(|𝛦𝜃12/𝛦𝜚12|)
  • minabsdxy: min(|dxy,muon1|, |dxy,muon2|)
  • excesshits: one of the muons has valid pixel hits > expected pixel hits

(only if DV_rhoCorr > 3.5)

  • expected hits computed with code here
⚫ Full .csv file with 6700 events located at http://uaf-1.t2.ucsd.edu/~namin/dump/

scouting/synchronization/data_2017D_v1.csv

  • Small excerpt below

Synchronization exercise

8

Baseline selections

Exactly 2 OS muons and 1 DV in collections, then

  • DV
  • (x, y, z) errors < (0.05, 0.05, 0.1) cm
  • chi2/ndof < 5
  • 𝜍 < 11 cm (corrected wrt beamspot)
  • Muon (pT > 3 GeV, |𝜃| < 2.4)
  • ID
  • Num. tracker layers with meas. > 5
  • chi2/ndof < 3
  • Isolation
  • Track isolation < 0.1
  • 𝛦R with closest jet > 0.3
  • Dimuon kinematics
  • cos(𝛦𝜚(dimuon, DV vector)) > 0
  • |𝛦𝜚(muon 1, muon 2)| < 2.8
  • |𝛦𝜚(dimuon, DV vector)| < 0.02

2017 trigger seeds

L1 — OR of

  • DoubleMu4_SQ_OS_dR_Max1p2
  • DoubleMu0er1p4_SQ_OS_dR_Max1p4
  • DoubleMu_15_7

event lumi run mass DV_x DV_y DV_rhoCorr lxy Muon1_pt Muon1_eta Muon2_pt Muon2_eta absdphimumu absdphimudv logabsetaphi minabsdxy excesshits 275917 1 302033 1.998553 0.041384

  • 0.118164

0.095345 0.096442 3.777374

  • 1.525164

3.693338

  • 1.935441

0.336688 0.017988 0.085850 0.014101 FALSE 557404 1 302033 3.114660 0.086439

  • 0.024343

0.008920 0.007603 3.534004 1.285894 3.492911 1.239324 0.914805 0.000662

  • 1.293223

0.003911 FALSE ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 31731494 39 302033 3.090746 0.144525

  • 0.168947

0.148740 0.150040 8.232279 1.198552 3.358588 1.584871 0.442521 0.015190

  • 0.058988

0.021072 FALSE 31837797 39 302033 2.872157 0.063578

  • 0.009160

0.031519 0.030407 5.625279

  • 1.265867

4.952267

  • 0.736468

0.086819 0.014454 0.785169 0.001000 FALSE

slide-9
SLIDE 9

⚫ Checked consistency between 2017 and 2018

  • Updated baseline selection
  • Should finalize L1 seeds for the two years

⚫ Synchronization exercise

Summary

9

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Backup

10

slide-11
SLIDE 11

⚫ H(125)→ZDZD→2𝜈+2X

  • Efficiency of generator-level fiducial denominator requirement with respect to full sample

is ~64%

  • Reco*trigger efficiency below shows efficiency dropping to ~30% due to pixel bias cuts

Signal generation/efficiencies

11

slide-12
SLIDE 12

⚫ c𝜐=50mm, mZD=20GeV signal MC ⚫ ~12 (38)% of signal has pT<10 (20) GeV

Signal kinematics

12

slide-13
SLIDE 13

⚫ Track isolation computation based on the

hltIter2L3MuonMergedNoVtx track collection

  • Calculated within a cone of 𝛦R<0.3 for tracks

within dz<0.2 and d0<0.1

  • Exclude 𝛦R<0.01 tracks
  • Exclude leading track if it has pT>2 GeV and

𝛦R<0.025

⚫ However, stored ScoutingTrack collection from

hltIterL3MuonAndMuonFromL1MergedNoVtx

⚫ Sanity cuts on DV errors eliminate the majority of

the peak at 1

Track isolation

13

max(DV x error, DV y error) DV z error

slide-14
SLIDE 14

⚫ Using the baseline selection with mass > 5 GeV, DV 𝜍 > 1 cm, further require

  • log10|𝛦𝜃12/𝛦𝜚12| < 2.0
  • no excess pixel hits for either muon
  • min(|dxy,muon1|, |dxy,muon2|) > 0.05 cm

⚫ With respect to (baseline, mass > 5GeV, DV 𝜍 > 1 cm), these 3 selections are ~90% efficient on the

signal

⚫ Plot mass distributions separately for baseline selection with isolation requirements, and with relaxed

isolation requirements

  • No data in either case for the 1fb-1 subset of 2018 data
  • In fact, no data down to DV 𝜍 = 0.3 in isolated case (though low statistics…)

Mass distribution

14 require isolation relax isolation