threshold resummation in direct photon production
play

Threshold resummation in direct photon production Nobuo Sato - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Threshold resummation in direct photon production Nobuo Sato Florida State University In collaboration with: J. Owens D. Westmark Motivation: Parton distribution functions (PDFs) - essential ingredients for hadron colliders. PDFs


  1. Threshold resummation in direct photon production Nobuo Sato Florida State University In collaboration with: J. Owens D. Westmark

  2. Motivation: ◮ Parton distribution functions (PDFs) - essential ingredients for hadron colliders. ◮ PDFs cannot be computed from first principles - extracted from experimental data. ◮ The uncertainties in the fitted PDFs are different among the parton species. ◮ In particular, gluon distribution is highly unconstrained at large x ! ◮ Production of a state with mass m and rapidity y probes PDFs at x ∼ ( m/ √ s ) e ± y which is relevant for BSM physics.

  3. Motivation: How to constrain gluon PDF at large x ? → Single inclusive direct photon production at fixed target experiments. ◮ In the past, the data was used to constrain gluon PDF at large x ≤ 0 . 6 . ◮ It was removed from global fittings due to inconsistencies between the theory at NLO and the data of various fixed target experiments.

  4. Motivation: 6 WA70 √ s = 23 . 0GeV pp CDF √ s = 1800 . 0GeV p¯ data / theory(NLO) vs . x T p D0 √ s = 1960 . 0GeV p¯ µ R , IF , FF = 0 . 5 ∗ p T p 5 E706 √ s = 31 . 5GeV pp FFs = BFG II E706 √ s = 38 . 7GeV pp PHENIX √ s = 200 . 0GeV pp 4 R110 √ s = 63 . 0GeV pp data / theory(NLO) R806 √ s = 63 . 0GeV pp R807 √ s = 63 . 0GeV pp UA6 √ s = 24 . 3GeV pp 3 UA6 √ s = 24 . 3GeV p¯ p 2 1 0 0 . 2 0 . 4 0 . 6 10 − 2 10 − 1 x T

  5. Motivation: Can we improve theory at NLO? → threshold resummation for single inclusive direct photon production. ◮ Catani, Mangano, Nason, Oleari, Vogelsang, hep-ph/9903436 (direct contribution) ◮ de Florian, Vogelsang, hep-ph/0506150 (direct + jet fragmentation)

  6. Theory of direct photons At LO: (a) direct contribution (b) jet fragmentation dσ ( x T ) � f a/A ( x a , µ IF ) ∗ f b/B ( x b , µ IF ) ∗ D γ/c ( z, µ F F ) ∗ ˆ p 3 = Σ(ˆ x T , ... ) T dp T a,b,c ◮ Direct contribution: D γ/γ = δ (1 − z ) ◮ Jet fragmentation: D γ/c ∼ α em /α S

  7. Theory of direct photons Beyond LO: dσ ( x T ) � f a/A ( x a , µ IF ) ∗ f b/B ( x b , µ IF ) ∗ D γ/c ( z, µ F F ) ∗ ˆ p 3 = Σ(ˆ x T , ... ) T dp T a,b,c 1 LO α s L 2 α s L α s NLO α 2 s L 4 α 2 s L 3 α 2 s L 2 α 2 s L NNLO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . α n s L 2 n α n s L 2 n − 1 α n s L 2 n − 2 N n LO ... LL NLL NNLL ... √ ˆ x T = 2 p T /z ˆ s ˆ s = x a x b S x 2 L = ln(1 − ˆ T ) “Threshold logs” ◮ Resummation: technique to find the exponential representation of threshold logs.

  8. Theory of direct photons When are threshold logs important? � 1 � 1 � 1 x 2 dσ ( x T ) � � p 3 � T = dx a dx b dzf a ( x a ) f b ( x b ) D ( z )Σ T z 2 x a x b dp T x 2 xT x 2 T a,b,f T xa √ xaxb CDF:(collider) √ √ ˆ x T = 2 p T /z s ˆ S = 1 . 8 TeV s = x a x b S ˆ x T = [0 . 03 , 0 . 11] x 2 L = ln(1 − ˆ T ) UA6:(fixed target) √ x T ˆ x T = z √ x a x b = [ x T , 1] S = 24 GeV √ x T = [0 . 3 , 0 . 6] x T = 2 p T / S ◮ Threshold logs are more relevant for fixed target experiments. ◮ Due to trigger bias effect � z � → 1 which leads to enhancement of fragmentation component from theshold logs.

  9. Theory of direct photons Key observation: D.de Florian,W.Vogelsang (Phys.Rev. D72 (2005)) Fractional Contribution 1 . 0 direct direct+fragment fragment direct+fragment 0 . 8 LO NLO 0 . 6 NLL ratio 0 . 4 ratio vs . p T pp → γ + X √ s = 24 . 3 GeV 0 . 2 PDFs = Cteq6 FFs = BFG µ R , IF , FF = p T 0 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 5 5 . 0 5 . 5 6 . 0 6 . 5 7 . 0 p T

  10. Theory of direct photons ◮ Resummation is performed in “mellin space”: � 1 � c + i ∞ 1 dxx N − 1 f ( x ) dNx − N F N f N = f ( x ) = 2 πi 0 c − i ∞ ◮ The invariant cross section in N-space: dσ ( N ) p 3 � f a/A ( N + 1) f b/B ( N + 1) D γ/c (2 N + 3)ˆ = Σ( N ) T dp T a,b,f ◮ The resummed partonic cross section in N-space is given by: Σ NLL ( N ) = Ce S [ln( N +1)] ˆ ˆ Σ Born ( N ) e S (ln( N )) = ∆ a G i ∆ ( int ) N ∆ b N ∆ c N J d � N i,N i

  11. Phenomenology NLO 10 2 NLO + NLL UA6 ζ = 0 . 5 10 1 ζ = 1 . 0 Ed σ/ d 3 p (pb) ζ = 2 . 0 10 0 Ed σ/ d 3 p (pb) vs p T (GeV) UA6 experiment 10 − 1 pp → γ + X √ s = 24 . 3 GeV PDFs = Cteq6 , FFs = BFGII 10 − 2 4 . 0 4 . 5 5 . 0 5 . 5 6 . 0 6 . 5 7 . 0 p T (GeV)

  12. NLO+NLL 7000.0 µ R = µ IF = µ FF = 0 . 5 ∗ p T 7000.0 1960.0 NLO 1800.0 630.0 1960.0 1800.0 S √ 630.0 DOF vs 630.0 630.0 546.0 χ 2 200.0 63.0 DOF profile 63.0 63.0 38.7 38.7 31.5 31.5 Phenomenology: χ 2 24.3 24.3 23.75 23.0 25 20 15 10 5 0 DOF χ 2

  13. NLO+NLL 7000.0 µ R = µ IF = µ FF = 1 . 0 ∗ p T 7000.0 1960.0 NLO 1800.0 630.0 1960.0 1800.0 S √ 630.0 DOF vs 630.0 630.0 546.0 χ 2 200.0 63.0 DOF profile 63.0 63.0 38.7 38.7 31.5 31.5 Phenomenology: χ 2 24.3 24.3 23.75 23.0 25 20 15 10 5 0 DOF χ 2

  14. NLO+NLL 7000.0 µ R = µ IF = µ FF = 2 . 0 ∗ p T 7000.0 1960.0 NLO 1800.0 630.0 1960.0 1800.0 S √ 630.0 DOF vs 630.0 630.0 546.0 χ 2 200.0 63.0 DOF profile 63.0 63.0 38.7 38.7 31.5 31.5 Phenomenology: χ 2 24.3 24.3 23.75 23.0 25 20 15 10 5 0 DOF χ 2

  15. S NLO+NLL √ 7000.0 µ R = µ IF = µ FF = 0 . 5 ∗ p T Optimal Normalization vs 7000.0 1960.0 NLO 1800.0 630.0 1960.0 1800.0 Phenomenology: Optimal normalization 630.0 630.0 630.0 546.0 200.0 63.0 63.0 63.0 38.7 38.7 31.5 31.5 24.3 24.3 23.75 23.0 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Optimal Normalization

  16. S NLO+NLL √ 7000.0 µ R = µ IF = µ FF = 1 . 0 ∗ p T Optimal Normalization vs 7000.0 1960.0 NLO 1800.0 630.0 1960.0 1800.0 Phenomenology: Optimal normalization 630.0 630.0 630.0 546.0 200.0 63.0 63.0 63.0 38.7 38.7 31.5 31.5 24.3 24.3 23.75 23.0 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Optimal Normalization

  17. S NLO+NLL √ 7000.0 µ R = µ IF = µ FF = 2 . 0 ∗ p T Optimal Normalization vs 7000.0 1960.0 NLO 1800.0 630.0 1960.0 1800.0 Phenomenology: Optimal normalization 630.0 630.0 630.0 546.0 200.0 63.0 63.0 63.0 38.7 38.7 31.5 31.5 24.3 24.3 23.75 23.0 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Optimal Normalization

  18. Phenomenology: Gluon constraints ◮ Bayesian reweighting technique. Watt and Thorne (1205.4024), NNPDF collaboration (1012.0836) ◮ The idea: ◮ Compute cross section for the available data sets using an ensemble of N random PDFs: { PDF K } . ◮ Compute the χ 2 DOF ( k ) of the combined data sets for each member PDF K in the ensemble. ◮ Compute weights as: e − 1 2 χ 2 DOF ( k ) w K = N k e − 1 2 χ 2 DOF ( k ) � ◮ The new constrained PDFs and its uncertainty can be written as: � PDF � ( x, Q ) = 1 � w k PDF ( x, Q ) k N k � 1 � w k ( PDF ( x, Q ) k − � PDF � ( x, Q )) 2 δ � PDF � ( x, Q ) = N k

  19. Phenomenology: Gluon constraints (preliminary) eigen directions 1 . 4 reweighted 1 . 2 Ratio to CTEQ6 1 . 0 0 . 8 Gluon(x , Q = 10 . 0 GeV) 0 . 6 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 x

  20. Conclusions: ◮ High- x PDFs important for production of a state with mass m at forward rapidities. ◮ Threshold resummation improves the theoretical prediction of direct photons at fixed target experiments → potential constrains on gluon PDF up to x ∼ 0 . 6 . To do: ◮ Constrain PDFs with threshold resummation in DIS and lepton-pair production (D. Westmark). ◮ Compare our results with SCET calculations by Becher and Schwarts (only resummation of direct part).

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend