ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | Root Listing
root/cvsroot/UserCode/benhoob/cmsnotes/ZMet2012/interpretation.tex
(Generate patch)

Comparing UserCode/benhoob/cmsnotes/ZMet2012/interpretation.tex (file contents):
Revision 1.1 by benhoob, Thu Sep 13 14:40:18 2012 UTC vs.
Revision 1.7 by benhoob, Tue Dec 18 09:49:08 2012 UTC

# Line 1 | Line 1
1   \section{Interpretation}
2 + \label{sec:interpretation}
3  
4 < The results of this search will be interpreted in the context of simplified model spectra (SMS).
5 < For the inclusive analysis, we will use the T5zz model depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:diagrams} (left).
6 < For the targeted analysis, we will use the TChiWZ model depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:diagrams} (right),
7 < and a GMSB model which produces a signature of \zzmet.
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 > 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 > The exclusion is performed using the results of simultaneous counting experiments in the five exclusive \MET\ signal regions defined by \MET\ $>$ 80 GeV,
10 > as summarized in Table~\ref{tab:results_targ} (commonly referred to as a ``shape analysis'').
11 > 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 > For the \wzmet\ model, the signal efficiency times acceptance and cross section upper limits are displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:results_wzmet},
19 > 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 > 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 > \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 > The results of the interpretation in the GMSB \zzmet\ model are displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:results_gmsb},
63 > as a function of the chargino and neutralino mass parameter $\mu$. These results exclude the range $196 < \mu < 316$~GeV.
64 >
65 > \begin{figure}[!hb]
66 > \begin{center}
67 > \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{plots/ZDIJET_GMSB.pdf}
68 > \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 > \label{fig:results_gmsb}}
74 > \end{center}
75 > \end{figure}
76 >
77 >
78 >
79 > \begin{table}[htb]
80 > \begin{center}
81 > \footnotesize
82 > \caption{\label{tab:gmsb} Summary of the parameters for the GMSB model used for the \zzmet\ interpretation.
83 > The masses of the lightest and second light neutralino, lightest chargino, and total next-to-leading order
84 > cross section, are indicated.}
85 > \begin{tabular}{l|cccc}
86 > \hline
87 > \hline
88 > $\mu$ [GeV] & $m_{\chizi}$ [GeV] & $m_{\chizii}$ [GeV] & $m_{\chipm}$ [GeV] & $\sigma_{\mathrm{NLO}}$ [pb] \\
89 > %$\mu$ [GeV] & $m_{\chizi}$ [GeV] &  &  &  \\
90 > \hline
91 > %110 & 102 & 111 & 104 & 7.3 \\
92 > 130 & 122 & 131 & 124 & 3.8  \\
93 > 150 & 141 & 151 & 144 & 2.1  \\
94 > 170 & 161 & 171 & 164 & 1.3  \\
95 > 190 & 181 & 191 & 184 & 0.84 \\
96 > 210 & 201 & 211 & 203 & 0.56 \\
97 > 230 & 221 & 231 & 223 & 0.38 \\
98 > 250 & 240 & 251 & 243 & 0.27 \\
99 > 270 & 260 & 271 & 263 & 0.20 \\
100 > 290 & 280 & 291 & 283 & 0.14 \\
101 > 310 & 299 & 311 & 302 & 0.11 \\
102 > 330 & 319 & 331 & 322 & 0.080 \\
103 > 350 & 339 & 351 & 342 & 0.061 \\
104 > 370 & 358 & 371 & 362 & 0.047 \\
105 > 390 & 378 & 391 & 381 & 0.037 \\
106 > 410 & 398 & 411 & 401 & 0.029 \\
107 > \hline
108 > \hline
109 > \end{tabular}
110 > \end{center}
111 > \end{table}

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines