Standard Model
backgrounds to h®gg are :
- Z/g*®ee
- Wg (W®en)
- QCD containing photons and/or
jets misidentified as EM objects: gg , gj, jj
ee,Wg and gg are estimated from Monte Carlo while gj and jj are estimated from data.
For each of the three processes I used MC samples to count number of events with at least 2 loose EMcandidates and to obtain mass distributions and then scaled those taking into account cross-sections of individual processes, integrated luminosity of di-EM data sample, trigger and offline EMID efficiencies.
In an attempt to reproduce the width of the Z-peak as it appears in the data the energies of loose EMcandidates are smeared according to the data-derived energy resolution described at the very bottom of this page
This table contains description of the samples,
values of the factors that were used for scaling and event counts at different stages.
The idea is to estimate gj+jj background contribution by using “EM+jets” data sample of
known luminosity and EMFakeRate obtained with an independent measurement.
This method can be used if EM-Rate
» EM-Fake-Rate, i.e.
ratio of EM clusters (coming from
both photons and misidentified jets) to jets » ratio of EM clusters coming from misidentified jets to
jets
I’ll try to show in a crude way
that for current measured EM-Rates (>= 4*10^-3)
this is indeed the case
I assume LO cross-sections ( s(gj)=1.4*10^4 pb ; s(jj)=3.5*10^7 pb)
and consider objects above 20GeV
Then
EM-rate = NofEMclusters/NofJets
= [N_of_”EM+Jets”_events]/
[N_of_multijet_events*<NofJets>]
= [s(gj)*e + s(jj)*2*EM-Fake-Rate]*Lint/ ([s(jj)*<NofJets>]*Lint) ( where e=EM efficiency )
= s(gj) *e
/s(jj) /<NofJets> + 2*EM-Fake-Rate/<NofJets>
= 0.4*10^-3*e/<NofJets> + 2*EM-Fake-Rate/<NofJets>
from this equation for
EM-rate=0.4*10^-3, e=1 and 2 <
(<NofJets>) <3
I obtain |EM-Rate -
EM-Fake-Rate|/EM-Rate < 10%
Having shown that EM-Rate » EM-Fake-Rate I’ll try to explain how gj+jj background
can be derived from “EM+jets” sample:
N_of_”EM+Jets”_events = [s(gj) *e + s(jj)*2*EM-Fake-Rate]*Lint(”EM+Jets”)
» [s(gj) *e
+ s(jj)*2*EM -Rate]*Lint(”EM+Jets”)
Ţ
[s(gj) *e
+ s(jj)*2*EM-Rate] = N_of_”EM+Jets”_events/ Lint(”EM+Jets”)
(1)
whereas for di-EM events due to gj+jj:
N_of_”di-EM”_events
due to gj + jj = [s(gj) *e *EM-Fake-Rate + s(jj)* EM-Fake-Rate^2]*Lint(”di-EM”)
»
[s(gj) *e
*EM-Rate + s(jj)* EM-Rate^2]*Lint(”di-EM”)
= EM-Rate* [s(gj) *e + s(jj)* EM-Rate]*Lint(”di-EM”)
= (1/2)*EM-Rate* [2*s(gj) *e + s(jj)* 2*EM-Rate]*Lint(”di-EM”)
= (1/2)*EM-Rate* [s(gj) *e +s(gj) *e + s(jj)* 2*EM-Rate]*Lint(”di-EM”)
{ in the same way as in EM-Rate » EM-Fake-Rate argument can show that
s(gj) *e/(s(jj)* 2*EM-Rate) <10% ,
then approximate by dropping s(gj) *e term }
= (1/2)*EM-Rate* [s(gj) *e + s(jj)* 2*EM-Rate]*Lint(”di-EM”)
now use equation (1)
= (1/2)*EM-Rate* Lint(”di-EM”)*
N_of_”EM+Jets”_events/ Lint(”EM+Jets”)
This is final equation : scaling
factor is (1/2)*EM-Rate* Lint(”di-EM”)* / Lint(”EM+Jets”)
So I selected “EM+jets” sample
from single good run 149330 requiring
-
“EM_HI” trigger pass
-
at least one EMcandidate
-
at least one Jet not
matched to EMcandidate
and calculated luminosity using
lm_access package (0.051 pb^-1)
Number of thus estimated gj +
jj events was
: 57 (CCCC), 67 (CCEC)