Multi-jet production at NLO with NJet Valery Yundin - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

multi jet production at nlo with njet
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Multi-jet production at NLO with NJet Valery Yundin - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Multi-jet production at NLO with NJet Valery Yundin Max-Planck-Institut f ur Physik in collaboration with S. Badger, B. Biedermann, A. Guffanti and P. Uwer HP2, 35 August 2014, GGI Firenze NLO QCD calculations NLO results provide more


  • Multi-jet production at NLO with NJet Valery Yundin Max-Planck-Institut f¨ ur Physik in collaboration with S. Badger, B. Biedermann, A. Guffanti and P. Uwer HP2, 3–5 August 2014, GGI Firenze

  • NLO QCD calculations NLO results provide more accurate predictions and theoretical uncertainties for multi-jet backgrounds in new physics searches. NLO vs LO 2500000 200000 LO LO NJet + Sherpa NLO pp → 3 jet at 7 TeV NLO 2000000 150000 ◮ Reduced theoretical 1500000 100000 σ (pb) σ (pb) uncertainty 1000000 50000 500000 0 NJet + Sherpa pp → 2 jet at 7 TeV 0 − 50000 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 x, µ R = x � H T x, µ R = x � H T NLO automation 30000 LO LO NJet + Sherpa pp → 4 jet at 7 TeV NLO 1500 NLO 25000 ◮ Great advances in the 20000 1000 15000 σ (pb) σ (pb) recent years 10000 500 5000 0 NJet + Sherpa 0 − 5000 pp → 5 jet at 7 TeV ◮ High-multiplicity still − 10000 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 x, µ R = x � x, µ R = x � H T H T remains a challenge — LO — NLO -1 / N

  • NLO setup Hard process ingredients � � � � dσ B � + � dσ R � σ NLO = n + dσ V dσ S n +1 − dσ S n + n +1 n +1 n 1 n +1 bottleneck bottleneck Complicated pieces 1. Virtual matrix elements [NJet, QCDLoop] ◮ Integration over loop momentum ◮ A number of new competing advanced methods 2. Real + subtraction [Sherpa, Comix] ◮ Tree-like ◮ Difficult phase-space integration 3. Linked with BLHA interface 0 / N

  • NJet 2.0 NJet version 2.0 1 Multi-parton matrix elements in massless QCD [ arXiv:1209.0100] ◮ Full colour-summed amplitudes for up to 5 outgoing partons ◮ Reliable accuracy estimate and rescue system ◮ BLHA interface for MC generators New in version 2.0 ◮ W ± /Z/γ with up to 5 jets and γγ with up to 4 jets . ◮ Leading/Subleading colour splitting. ◮ Hardware vectorization for scaling test. ◮ BLHA2 support. ◮ Fast analytic amplitudes for 2 and 3 jets. 1 available from project homepage https://bitbucket.org/njet/njet 1 / N

  • Binoth Les Houches Accord interface to One Loop matrix elements BLHA order.lh ◮ Simple uniform interface between Monte-Carlo (MC) and One Loop Providers (OLP) njet.py [arXiv:1001.1307, arXiv:1308.3462] BLHA in NJet 2.0 contract.lh ◮ Support BLHA1 and BLHA2 ◮ Provide colour/spin-correlated trees OLP Start ◮ Provide leading/subleading colour OLP EvalSubProcess and desymmetrized amplitudes OLP SetParameter BLHA extensions virt[-2] virt[-1] ◮ Control all settings via order file virt[0] ◮ Single point of interaction with OLP born 2 / N

  • Dealing with complexity of multi-leg NLO Advanced methods for computing amplitudes ◮ On-shell methods to avoid unphysical degrees of freedom (amplitudes from trees, rational terms from massive loop cuts) ◮ Efficient recursive construction of building blocks ◮ Relations between primitive amplitudes Time per phase-space point for dominating channels T ( n ) ∼ 2 n n 6 n ! , n – number of final states Getting rid of the factorial (offload to MC) ◮ Desymmetrizing final states (available in NJet) ◮ Separate integration of leading/subleading colour (available in NJet) ◮ Colour-dressed approach (available in Sherpa/COMIX) 3 / N

  • Why split into leading/subleading colour (at high multiplicity) Subleading colour ◮ Order of magnitude slower full colour 10 − 2 leading approx. ◮ Order of magnitude smaller NJet + Sherpa 10 − 3 dσ V /dp T,j 3 pp → γγ + 3 jet at 8 TeV ◮ Often cannot be ignored 10 − 4 Separate integration 10 − 5 ◮ Full colour 5 − 10 times faster 1 . 25 1 . 20 1 . 15 Disadvantages 1 . 10 1 . 05 ◮ Manual (no MC support) 1 . 00 0 . 95 50 100 150 200 ◮ µ R dep. has to be corrected p T,j 3 ◮ Not standardized in BLHA 4 / N

  • Example: Z + jets production with NJet+Sherpa ATLAS cuts. Agreement with [1304.1253] and [1108.2229] LO LO NLO NLO ATLAS 1304.7098 ATLAS 1304.7098 10 1 10 1 σ [pb] σ [pb] 10 0 NJet + Sherpa 10 0 NJet + Sherpa pp → Z [ → e + e − ] + jet s at 7 TeV pp → Z [ → µ + µ − ] + jet s at 7 TeV 1 . 15 1 . 15 Theory / data Theory / data 1 . 10 1 . 10 1 . 05 1 . 05 1 . 00 1 . 00 0 . 95 0 . 95 0 . 90 0 . 90 0 . 85 0 . 85 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Inclusive Jet Multiplicity Inclusive Jet Multiplicity 5 / N

  • Example: timing of W/Z + jets production with NJet+Sherpa Time spent in different parts of NLO calculation 3 . 0 B W + jets V leading 10 2 V(lead.) Z + jets V leading 2 . 5 W + jets V sub-leading V(sub-lead.) Z + jets V sub-leading I average time per event (s) 10 1 RS 2 . 0 time (cpu years) 10 0 x4 1 . 5 NJet + Sherpa 10 − 1 pp → Z + jets 1 . 0 10 − 2 x9 0 . 5 10 − 3 x16 x25 10 − 4 0 . 0 0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 # jets # jets 6 / N

  • Efficient use of results is crucial High multiplicity calculations are expensive ◮ Typical 5 final state calculations take ∼ 10 5 CPU · hours. ◮ Do not want to run it more than once. Layered computation set-up ◮ Save generated events in ROOT NTuples. [arXiv:1003.1241] ◮ Analyze later (still several days per analysis). ◮ Interpolation grids with APPLgrid for fast PDF convolution and scale variations. [arXiv:1312.4460] 7 / N

  • Saving events for further analysis NLO calculations are expensive and we need to use the results as efficiently as possible. ROOT NTuples output [arXiv:1003.1241] ◮ Save weigths, PDFs, scheme dependence ◮ Compact compressed storage ◮ Can change scales/PDFs during analysis ◮ Several jet algorithms at low cost 8 / N

  • Interpolation grids to speed-up PDF convolution APPLgrid – interpolation grids in Q , x 1 , x 2 for each bin in histogram. NTuples: ∼ 1000 GB space, ∼ 30 hours to analyze, completely generic APPLgrid: ∼ 1 GB space, ∼ 0 . 1 hour to analyze, specific observable/binning APPL LO 30000 APPL NLO HT/2 LO NLO 25000 1800000 20000 15000 NJet + Sherpa σ (pb) 10000 pp → 2 jet at 7 TeV 1600000 5000 0 NJet + Sherpa − 5000 pp → 4 jet at 7 TeV 1400000 − 10000 σ (pb) 0 1 2 3 4 5 x, µ R = x � H T 3000 1200000 APPL LO APPL NLO HT/2 LO 2500 NLO 2000 1000000 1500 APPL LO APPL NLO HT/2 σ (pb) 1000 APPL LO APPL NLO HT/40 500 LO HT/2 800000 NLO HT/2 0 NJet + Sherpa NLO HT/40 pp → 5 jet at 7 TeV − 500 10 − 1 10 0 − 1000 x, µ R = x � H n 0 1 2 3 4 5 x, µ R = x � T H T 9 / N

  • Analysis methods comparison On-the-fly: NTuples: APPLgrid: + Zero disk space cost − High disk space cost + Low disk space cost −− Scale/PDF vars. ± Scale/PDF vars. ++ Scale/PDF vars. Extremely high moderate CPU cost low CPU cost CPU cost − Flexibility low ++ Flexibility high − Flexibility low + Can use standard − Needs custom − Needs custom tools: Rivet software software Most important for high-multiplicity fixed order NLO are flexibility and cheap scale/PDF variations: NTuples+APPLgrid 10 / N

  • NJet+Sherpa: γγ + 3 j at 8 TeV, scale variations, CT10nlo PDF 2 . 0 Cuts µ R ;0 = H ′ T / 2 p T,j > 30 GeV µ R ;0 = � H ′ T / 2 NJet + Sherpa √ | η j | ≤ 4 . 7 µ R ;0 = Σ 2 / 2 pp → γγ + 3 j @ 8 TeV 1 . 5 p T,γ 1 > 40 GeV µ R ;0 = � H T / 2 p T,γ 2 > 25 GeV | η γ | ≤ 2 . 5 σ [pb] R γ,j = 0 . 5 1 . 0 R γ,γ = 0 . 45 Scales H T = Σ � p T,i 0 . 5 i ∈{ γ, partons } H ′ � T = m γγ + Σ p T,i i ∈ partons 0 . 0 H ′ T = m γγ + Σ p T,i 1 2 3 4 5 x, µ R = xµ R ;0 i ∈ jets Σ 2 = m 2 γγ + Σ p 2 σ LO γγ +3 j ( � T / 2) = 0 . 643(0 . 003) +0 . 278 T,i H ′ − 0 . 180 pb i ∈ jets σ NLO γγ +3 j ( � H ′ T / 2) = 0 . 785(0 . 010) +0 . 027 − 0 . 085 pb 11 / N

  • NJet+Sherpa: γγ + 3 j at 8 TeV, m γγ distribution and PDF uncertainties PDF uncertainty ≈ 3 − 6% 10 − 2 LO NLO CT10 NLO NLO NNPDF23 dσ/dm γγ [pb GeV − 2 ] NLO MSTW2008 dσ/dm γγ [pb GeV − 2 ] NLO ABM11 10 − 3 10 − 3 NJet + Sherpa 10 − 4 pp → γγ + 3 jet at 8 TeV NJet + Sherpa 10 − 4 pp → γγ + 3 jet at 8 TeV 1 . 06 1 . 6 1 . 04 1 . 02 1 . 4 1 . 00 1 . 2 0 . 98 1 . 0 0 . 96 0 . 8 0 . 94 0 . 6 0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 m γγ m γγ Di-photon invariant mass distribution 12 / N

  • NJet+Sherpa: total XS for 2, 3, 4, 5 jets at 7 TeV vs ATLAS measurements Cuts LO 10 6 NLO anti-kt R = 0 . 4 ATLAS data p 1st > 80 GeV CERN-PH-EP-2011-098 10 5 T p other > 60 GeV σ (pb) T 10 4 | η | < 2 . 8 10 3 NJet + Sherpa NLO pp → jets at 7 TeV 10 2 µ R = µ F = ˆ H T / 2 vars. ˆ H T / 4 and ˆ H T Theory / data α s ( M Z ) = 0 . 118 2 NNPDF23 PDF set 1 2 3 4 5 6 Inclusive Jet Multiplicity 13 / N

  • NJet+Sherpa: jets ratios at 7 TeV with different PDFs vs ATLAS data 0 . 18 Cuts NNPDF2.3 MSTW2008 anti-kt R = 0 . 4 CT10 p 1st > 80 GeV T 0 . 14 ABM11 p other > 60 GeV ATLAS data T CERN-PH-EP-2011-098 | η | < 2 . 8 σ n +1 /σ n 0 . 10 NLO µ R = µ F = ˆ H T / 2 vars. ˆ H T / 4 and ˆ H T 0 . 06 (shown for NNPDF) NJet + Sherpa α s ( M Z ) = 0 . 118 pp → jets at 7 TeV 0 . 02 2 3 4 14 / N n