Jet Substructure

From Wiki Les Houches 09

Revision as of 09:25, 12 June 2009 by Jmb (Talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search

Back to Tools_and_Monte_Carlo_Session_1_(SM)#Jet_Physics.

Boosted hadronic decays of massive particles (W,Z,Top,H,BSM..., with session 2) and jet mass/shape studies with QCD jets in early data.

Interested parties (Session 1)

Matt Schwartz, Giacinto Piaquadio, Mario Campanelli, Paulo Francvilla, Jon Butterworth, Peter Loch, Ezio Maina, Leif Lonnblad, Keith Hamilton, Simon Dean, ...

Examine/discuss the different regions of validity for calculations of variables like jet mass, jet width, subjet multiplicity, using e.g. (N)LO ME, PS, matched and resummed calculations etc... (see also A Collection of Matching Benchmarks). Review, compare, critique literature, think about future ideas.

Recent preprint on Zbb and Wbb at NLO.


Types of object one might use substructure on

QCD jets (quark gluon separation)

Wjj provides a sample of quark jets at LHC?

SUSY cascades are rich in quark jets. Could use quark ID to simplify decay chains.

LEP papers.

CDF conference proceedings (2004).

ZEUS paper.

Colour singlet heavy objects, two body decay (W,Z,H...)

Colour singlet heavy objects, three body decay (Neutralino,...)

Coloured heavy objects (top,...)

Schwartz slides from top theory workshop May 18, 2009

MC issues

Differences in heavy object decays; different parton showers, matrix element corrections in some MC, not in others; in Herwig, Herwig++, pythia, sherpa. POWHEG improvement soon. See talk from Carlo Oleari Friday afternoon for some discussion of MC@NLO and POWHEG in Higgs decays. Dead cones etc. Keith Hamilton, Giacinto Piacquadio, Matt Schwartz, Leif? to produce a short summary of the effects implemented in different MCs.

Keith's slides on Dead Zones to link here.

How sensitive are the various subjet methods to the above differences?

Would be nice to have some truth level comparisons, of simple variables (jet mass etc) and also of some of the various boosted decay methods (esp top?) if possible.

Detector issues

Pile-up, calorimeter noise, granularity.

Slides from Peter Loch to be linked here.

Studies from GP.

Proposed cuts for studying this:

  • pT cut on constituents (MeV) 0,100,500,1000,2000.

Find the jet first, then cut on constituents, or cut on constituents first then find the jet?

Incomplete set of jet substructure references

* Butterworth+ W/Z+higgs (Cambridge/Aachen)
* Kaplan+ top tagging
* Seymour+ clustering (kT algorithm)
* Butterworth+ WW (kT y scales) 
* The above analysis was carried out with a full detector simulation in the WW scattering chapter (p1769) of this big ATLAS paper.
* Butterworth+ W,Z,H in SUSY cascades (kT y scale again)
* Dokshitzer+ clustering
* Almeida+ and Almeida+ top event shapes
* Butterworth+ neutralinos (kT yscales and Cambridge/Aachen)
* ATLAS public note (SUSY09) on neutralinos from subjet structure
* S. Ellis+ jet pruning, using top as an example
* Krohn+ variable R
* Top ID using kT y scales this Les Houches report (p106)
* Bahr+ Herwig++ manual (includes heavy particle decays)
* Hamilton+ Showers for top decay
Personal tools