| 1 |
benhoob |
1.1 |
\section{Interpretation}
|
| 2 |
benhoob |
1.5 |
\label{sec:interpretation}
|
| 3 |
benhoob |
1.1 |
|
| 4 |
benhoob |
1.4 |
In this section, we interpret the results of the targeted search in the context of the \wzmet\ model depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:diagrams} (right)
|
| 5 |
|
|
and a gauge-mediated SUSY breaking (GMSB) model that produces a signature of \zzmet\ will be added. The results of the targeted search presented here
|
| 6 |
benhoob |
1.3 |
will be combined with those of the trilepton ewkino search for the final \wzmet\ interpretation, and with the quadlepton ewkino search
|
| 7 |
|
|
for the final GMSB \zzmet\ interpretation.
|
| 8 |
|
|
|
| 9 |
benhoob |
1.5 |
The exclusion is performed using the results of simultaneous counting experiments in the five exclusive \MET\ signal regions defined by \MET\ $>$ 80 GeV,
|
| 10 |
benhoob |
1.3 |
as summarized in Table~\ref{tab:results_targ} (commonly referred to as a ``shape analysis'').
|
| 11 |
benhoob |
1.5 |
The upper limit calculation is performed with the LandS software using the LHC-type CLs criterion.
|
| 12 |
|
|
The signal efficiency uncertainties include the luminosity (4.4\%), acceptance for the b-jet veto (4\%), lepton ID and isolation efficiency (2\% per lepton),
|
| 13 |
|
|
and trigger efficiency (3\%). The uncertainty from JES is determined following the POG-recommended procedure, by varying the jet energies by the
|
| 14 |
|
|
\pt- and $\eta$-dependent uncertainties and propagating this to the jet multiplicity, dijet mass, and \MET.
|
| 15 |
|
|
The background uncertainties are quoted in Table~\ref{tab:results_targ}. For each background contribution, the uncertainty is assumed to be 100\%
|
| 16 |
|
|
correlated across all signal regions.
|
| 17 |
|
|
|
| 18 |
benhoob |
1.4 |
For the \wzmet\ model, the signal efficiency times acceptance and cross section upper limits are displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:results_wzmet},
|
| 19 |
benhoob |
1.3 |
along with the observed and expected exclusion contours, which are compared to the 2011 observed exclusion contour.
|
| 20 |
|
|
Figure~\ref{fig:results_wzmetpoints} shows the excluded points used to derive the exclusion contours. We note that the map of exclusion
|
| 21 |
|
|
contours appears quite ragged since for many of the points the cross section upper limit is very close to the theory cross section.
|
| 22 |
|
|
Therefore we do not expect the ragged exclusion region to be an issue for the final results since
|
| 23 |
|
|
we currently have 9.2 fb$^{-1}$ and expect the luminosity to increase significantly. A {\bf VERY APPROXIMATE} projection of the expected excluded region
|
| 24 |
|
|
for an integrated luminosity of 15 fb$^{-1}$ (a rough guess at the final HCP data sample) is obtained by scaling the expected cross section limits by
|
| 25 |
|
|
$\sqrt{(9.2 \rm{fb}^{-1})/(15 \rm{fb}^{-1})}$, as displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:results_15fb}.
|
| 26 |
|
|
|
| 27 |
|
|
\begin{figure}[!ht]
|
| 28 |
|
|
\begin{center}
|
| 29 |
|
|
\begin{tabular}{cc}
|
| 30 |
|
|
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{plots/wzsms_eff.pdf}
|
| 31 |
|
|
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{plots/wzsms_xsec.pdf}
|
| 32 |
|
|
\end{tabular}
|
| 33 |
|
|
\caption{ Interpretation of the targeted analysis in the \wzmet\ model. The acceptance times efficiency (left) and cross section
|
| 34 |
benhoob |
1.6 |
upper limit (right) are displayed. The observed and expected exclusion contours are indicated and compared to the observed
|
| 35 |
|
|
exclusion from the 2011 analysis.
|
| 36 |
|
|
%\newline
|
| 37 |
|
|
%Interpretation of the $\rm{Z}+\rm{dijet}$ analysis in the \wzmet\ model of Fig.~2(a).
|
| 38 |
|
|
%The shading indicates the cross section upper limit. The observed and expected exclusion contours are indicated and compared to the observed
|
| 39 |
|
|
%exclusion from the 2011 analysis. The region below the contours is excluded at 95\% confidence level.
|
| 40 |
benhoob |
1.3 |
\label{fig:results_wzmet}}
|
| 41 |
|
|
\end{center}
|
| 42 |
|
|
\end{figure}
|
| 43 |
|
|
|
| 44 |
|
|
\begin{figure}[!hb]
|
| 45 |
|
|
\begin{center}
|
| 46 |
|
|
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{plots/wzsms_points.pdf}
|
| 47 |
|
|
\caption{ Observed (left) and expected (right) excluded points for the \wzmet\ interpretation, with the corresponding exclusion contours overlaid.
|
| 48 |
|
|
\label{fig:results_wzmetpoints}}
|
| 49 |
|
|
\end{center}
|
| 50 |
|
|
\end{figure}
|
| 51 |
|
|
|
| 52 |
|
|
\clearpage
|
| 53 |
|
|
|
| 54 |
|
|
\begin{figure}[!ht]
|
| 55 |
|
|
\begin{center}
|
| 56 |
|
|
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{plots/wzsms_expected_15fb.pdf}
|
| 57 |
|
|
\caption{ A {\bf VERY APPROXIMATE} projection of the expected excluded points for an integrated luminosity of 15$^{-1}$.
|
| 58 |
|
|
\label{fig:results_15fb}}
|
| 59 |
|
|
\end{center}
|
| 60 |
|
|
\end{figure}
|
| 61 |
|
|
|
| 62 |
benhoob |
1.4 |
The results of the interpretation in the GMSB \zzmet\ model are displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:results_gmsb},
|
| 63 |
benhoob |
1.5 |
as a function of the chargino and neutralino mass parameter $\mu$. These results exclude the range $196 < \mu < 316$~GeV.
|
| 64 |
benhoob |
1.4 |
|
| 65 |
|
|
\begin{figure}[!hb]
|
| 66 |
|
|
\begin{center}
|
| 67 |
benhoob |
1.5 |
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{plots/ZDIJET_GMSB.pdf}
|
| 68 |
benhoob |
1.6 |
\caption{ Interpretation of the targeted analysis in the GMSB \zzmet\ model.
|
| 69 |
|
|
%\newline
|
| 70 |
|
|
%Interpretation of the $\rm{Z}+\rm{dijet}$ analysis in the GMSB model discussed in the text.
|
| 71 |
|
|
%The observed and expected cross section upper limits are indicated as a function of the mass parameter $\mu$, and are compared to the theory
|
| 72 |
|
|
%cross section. The region $196 < \mu < 316$~GeV is excluded at 95\% confidence level.
|
| 73 |
benhoob |
1.4 |
\label{fig:results_gmsb}}
|
| 74 |
|
|
\end{center}
|
| 75 |
|
|
\end{figure}
|
