TRUCTURE DISCOVERIES , F · CONTINUOUS PROGRESS PARTON LUMINOSITIES (NNLO) GLUON GLUON NNPDF NLO...

PROTONSTRUCTURE

FORLHC

DISCOVERIES

STEFANOFORTE

UNIV

ERSITA

DIM

ILANO&

INFN

HIG

GSM

AXWELL

MEETIN

GEDIN

BURGH,FEBRUARY8,2012

DIS

COVERY

AT

THES

p

�p

SAND

AT

THELHC

DIS

COVERYOFTHE

W

(1984)

pT

distribution

ofthe

e

and

�

from

W

de ay

at

U

A

1

(1984)

DIS

COVERYOFTHE

HIG

GS(2011?)

[GeV

]4l

m

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

Events / 5 GeV

024681012-1

Ldt

= 4

.8 fb

∫ =

7 T

eV,

sD

ata

2011

,

AT

LA

SP

relim

inar

yD

ata =13

0 G

eV, 1

xSM

Hm To

tal b

ackg

roun

d 4l→

(*)

ZZ

→H

transverse

energy

distribution

in

the

four

lepton

hannelat

A

T

LA

S

(2011)

�

HADRON

COLLID

ER

CIR

CA1985

)“C

LEAN”DISCOVERY

SIG

NAL

�

HADRON

COLLID

ER

CIR

CA2010

)

PRECISIO

NPHYSIC

S

$

NEW

PHYSIC

S

PDFS

FROM

THES

p

�p

STO

THELHC

PDFS

IN1984

GHR

VSD

UKEO

WENS

PDFS

IN2011

GLUONG

LUON

LUMI

1/2

/ S

)S

( -3

10-2

10-1

10

G-G Lumi

0.8

0.850.9

0.95

1

1.051.

1

1.151.2

LHC

7 T

eV

NN

PD

F2.

1N

NP

DF

2.0 =0

.119

sα

CT

10 -

=0.1

19s

αM

ST

W08

-

LHC

7 T

eV

�u

�

� d

x0.

10.

20.

30.

40.

50.

60.

70.

80.

91

)0

2 (x, Q S ∆ -0

.020

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.080.

1

NN

PD

F2.

1

CT

10

MS

TW

08

NNPDF

VSMSTW

VSCTEQ,2011

�

HADRON

COLLID

ERS

CIR

CA1985

)

QUALITATIV

EQCD:DIS

COVERY

PHYSIC

S

�

DIS

ATNMC

ANDHERA19952

005

)

QUANTITATIV

EQCD:PRECIS

ION

PHYSIC

S

�

HADRON

COLLID

ERS

CIR

CA2010

)

PRECISIO

NQCD

$

NEW

PHYSIC

S

SUMMARY

�

PROTON

STRUCTURE

TODAY

{

PDFS,LUMIN

OSITIE

S,STANDARD

CANDLES

{

RECENT

PROGRESS

ATNLO

ANDNNLO

�

ISSUES

{

THE

MEANIN

GOFPDF

UNCERTAIN

TIE

S

{

DATA

CONSISTENCY

�

THE

IMPACTOFHADRON

COLLID

ER

DATA

{

JETS

AND

THE

GLUON

{

FLAVOR

SEPARATIO

N:D

RELLY

AN,W

ANDZ

�

PRECISIO

NPHYSIC

SATTHE

LHC

{

COLLID

ER

ONLYPDFS

{

THE

ROLE

OF

THELHC

DATA

�

AROAD

MAPFOR

THE

FUTURE

THE

STATE

OFTHE

ART

CURRENTPDFSETS

�X

(s;M

2 X

)=

P a;b

R 1 xm

in

dx1dx2fa=h1(x1)fb=h2(x2)^�qaqb!

X

� x1x2s;M

2 X

�

data

in

global�ts

x-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

101

]2

[ GeV2

T / p2

/ M2

Q

1

10

210

310

410

510

610

NM

C-p

dN

MC

SLA

CB

CD

MS

HE

RA

I-A

VC

HO

RU

SF

LH10

8N

TV

DM

NZ

EU

S-H

2Z

EU

SF

2CH

1F2C

DY

E60

5D

YE

886

CD

FW

AS

YC

DF

ZR

AP

D0Z

RA

PC

DF

R2K

TD

0R2C

ON

NN

PD

F2.

1 da

tase

t

LH

C

kinem

ati s

10-7

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

fixe

dta

rget

HE

RA

x 1,2

= (

M/1

4 T

eV)

exp(

± y)

Q =

M

LH

C p

arto

n ki

nem

atic

s

M =

10

GeV

M =

100

GeV

M =

1 T

eV

M =

10

TeV

66

y =

40

22

4

Q2 (GeV

2)

x

�

CT10:GLOBAL,LO+NLO,SEVERAL

�

sVALUES,VFN

�

MSTW08:GLOBAL,LO+NLO+NNLO,SEVERAL

�

s

VALUES,VFN

�

NNPDF2.12

.2:GLOBAL(INCL.LHC),LO+NLO+NNLO,SEVERAL

�

s

VALS.,VFN

�

ALEKHIN

ABKM:DIS

+SOMEDY,NLO+NNLO,SIN

GLE

�

s

VALUE,FFN

�

HERAPDF1.0

(1.5?):

HERADIS

,NLO+NNLO,SEVERAL

�

s

VALS,VFN

�

SETS

BASED

ON

MODEL

ASSUMPTIO

NS(G

RV/GJR,STATIS

TIC

ALPDFS,...)

FEATURES,TRADEOFFSAND

CHOIC

ES

�

DATASET:CTEQ,MSTW,NNPDF

FIX

ED

TARGET+

COLLID

ER,

eP

AND

� P

PDATA

(NNPDF:LHC);ABKM,GJR

GLOBALDIS

+FIX

ETT

ARGETDY;HERAPDF:

HERADIS

ONLY

�

STATISTIC

AL

TREATMENT:CTEQ,MSTW

HESSIA

NWITH

DYNAMIC

AL

TOLERANCE;HERAPDF,STANDARDH

ESSIA

N+PARM.ERROR

ANALYSIS;GJR,

HESSIA

NWITH

FIX

ED

TOLERANCE;ABKM

STANDARDH

ESSIA

N;NNPDFM

ONTE

CARLO(A

LSO

STUDIE

DBYHERAPDF,MSTW)

�

PARTON

PARAMETRIZATIO

N:CTEQ,MSTW,HERAPDF

x�(1

�

x)��

POLYNOMIA

LS;GJR:DITTO+

VALENCELIK

EASSUMPTIO

N;NNPDF

NEURAL

NETS;

CHEBYSHEV

POLYNOMIA

LS

STUDIE

DBYHERAPDF;

�

�

s

VALUE:CTEQ,NNPDF:EXTERNALPARAMETER,SEVERALVALUES

AVAILABLE;

MSTW:FITTED,BUT

ALSO

VARIA

BLE

AS

EXT.P

ARAMETER;ABKM,GJR:FITTED,

NOT

VARIA

BLE

AS

EXT.PARAMETER

�

PERTURBATIV

EORDER:CTEQ:LO+NLO;MSTW:LO+NLO+NNLO;NNPDF

LO+NLO+NNLO;ABKM,HERAPDF,GJR:NLO+NNLO

�

HEAVY

QUARKS:CTEQ:GMV

FN

(SACOT�

SCHEME);MSTW:GMV

FN

(ACOT+TR’SCHEME);NNPDF:GMV

FN

(FONLL

SCHEME);ABKM:FFN

(Nf

=

3;4

MATCHED

WITHBMSN

SCHEME);GJR:FFN

(Nf

=

3

)

LISTED

INDECREASIN

GORDER

OF

IMPORTANCE!

WHERE

DO

WE

STAND?

LHC

STANDARD

CANDLES(N

LO)

W

+

)2 Z

(MSα

0.11

40.

116

0.11

80.

120.

122

0.12

4

) (nb) ν+

l → +

B(W ⋅ +Wσ

5.4

5.6

5.86

6.2

6.4

68%

C.L

. PD

F

MS

TW

08

CT

EQ

6.6

CT

10

NN

PD

F2.

1

HE

RA

PD

F1.

0

HE

RA

PD

F1.

5

AB

KM

09

GJR

08

= 7

TeV

)s

at t

he L

HC

(ν+ l

→ +N

LO W

Sα

Out

er: P

DF

+In

ner:

PD

F o

nly

Ver

tical

err

or b

ars

G. Watt (September 2011)

)2 Z

(MSα

0.11

40.

116

0.11

80.

120.

122

0.12

4

) (nb) ν+

l → +

B(W ⋅ +Wσ

5.4

5.6

5.86

6.2

6.4

W

�

)2 Z

(MSα

0.11

40.

116

0.11

80.

120.

122

0.12

4

) (nb) ν-

l → -

B(W ⋅ - Wσ

3.7

3.8

3.94

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

68%

C.L

. PD

F

MS

TW

08

CT

EQ

6.6

CT

10

NN

PD

F2.

1

HE

RA

PD

F1.

0

HE

RA

PD

F1.

5

AB

KM

09

GJR

08

= 7

TeV

)s

at t

he L

HC

(ν- l

→ -N

LO W

Sα

Out

er: P

DF

+In

ner:

PD

F o

nly

Ver

tical

err

or b

ars


)2 Z

(MSα

0.11

40.

116

0.11

80.

120.

122

0.12

4

) (nb) ν-

l → -

B(W ⋅ - Wσ

3.7

3.8

3.94

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

TOP

Z

)2 Z

(MSα

0.11

40.

116

0.11

80.

120.

122

0.12

4

) (nb)-l

+ l →

0 B(Z ⋅ 0

Z σ

0.84

0.86

0.880.9

0.92

0.94

0.96

0.98

1

68%

C.L

. PD

F

MS

TW

08

CT

EQ

6.6

CT

10

NN

PD

F2.

1

HE

RA

PD

F1.

0

HE

RA

PD

F1.

5

AB

KM

09

GJR

08

= 7

TeV

)s

at t

he L

HC

(- l+ l

→ 0N

LO Z

Sα

Out

er: P

DF

+In

ner:

PD

F o

nly

Ver

tical

err

or b

ars


)2 Z

(MSα

0.11

40.

116

0.11

80.

120.

122

0.12

4

) (nb)-l

+ l →

0 B(Z ⋅ 0

Z σ

0.84

0.86

0.880.9

0.92

0.94

0.96

0.98

1

(G

.W

att,2011)

�

GLOBAL

FITS

INGOOD

MUTUALAGREEMENT

�

CHOIC

EOF

�

s

VALUE

IMPORTANT

�

PDF4LHC

RECOMMENDATIO

N:ENVELOPE

OFCTEQ,MSTW,NNPDF

WHERE

DO

WE

STAND?

PARTON

LUMIN

OSITIE

S(N

LO)

GLUONG

LUON

QUARKQ

UARK

(G

.W

att,2011)

QUARKG

LUON

1/2

/ S

)S

( -3

10-2

10-1

10

Q-Qbar Lumi

0.8

0.850.9

0.95

1

1.051.

1

1.151.2

LHC

7 T

eV

NN

PD

F2.

1N

NP

DF

2.0 =0

.119

sα

CT

10 -

=0.1

19s

αM

ST

W08

-

LHC

7 T

eV

CHARMC

HARM

1/2

/ S

)S

( -3

10-2

10-1

10

C-Cbar Lumi

0.8

0.850.9

0.95

1

1.051.

1

1.151.2

LHC

7 T

eV

NN

PD

F2.

1N

NP

DF

2.0 =0

.119

sα

CT

10 -

=0.1

19s

αM

ST

W08

-

LHC

7 T

eV

(N

N

PD

F,2011)

CONTIN

UOUSPROGRESS

PARTON

LUMIN

OSITIE

S(N

LO)

GLUONG

LUON

2010

2011

QUARKQ

UARK

2010

2011

(G

.W

att,2011)

�

NNPDF2.0

!

NNPDF2.1:IN

CLUSIO

NOFHW

MASSES

�

CTEQ6.6

!

CT10:IM

PROVED

STATIS

TIC

S,PARAMETRIZATIO

N,DATA

�

CONSID

ERABLY

IMPROVED

AGREEMENT!

CONTIN

UOUSPROGRESS

PARTON

LUMIN

OSITIE

S(N

NLO)

GLUONG

LUON

N

N

P

D

F

N

LO

vs.

N

N

LO

1/2

/ S

)2 X

( M

-210

-110

G-G Lumi 0.8

0.850.9

0.95

1

1.051.

1

1.151.2

1.251.3

PD

F U

ncer

tain

ty p

arto

n lu

mis

- L

HC

7 T

eV -

Rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

LO

PD

F U

ncer

tain

ty p

arto

n lu

mis

- L

HC

7 T

eV -

Rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

N

N

LO

N

N

P

D

F

2.1

vs.

M

ST

W

08

1/2

/ S

)2 X

( M

-310

-210

-110

G-G Lumi 0.8

0.850.9

0.95

1

1.051.

1

1.151.2

1.251.3

PD

F U

ncer

tain

ty p

arto

n lu

mis

- L

HC

7 T

eV -

Rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

=0.

119

sα

MS

TW

08 N

NLO

PD

F U

ncer

tain

ty p

arto

n lu

mis

- L

HC

7 T

eV -

Rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

QUARKQ

UARK

N

N

P

D

F

N

LO

vs.

N

N

LO

1/2

/ S

)2 X

( M

-210

-110

Q-Qbar Lumi

0.8

0.850.9

0.95

1

1.051.

1

1.151.2

1.251.3

PD

F U

ncer

tain

ty p

arto

n lu

mis

- L

HC

7 T

eV -

Rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

LO

PD

F U

ncer

tain

ty p

arto

n lu

mis

- L

HC

7 T

eV -

Rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

N

N

LO

N

N

P

D

F

2.1

vs.

M

ST

W

08

1/2

/ S

)2 X

( M

-310

-210

-110

Q-Qbar Lumi

0.8

0.850.9

0.95

1

1.051.

1

1.151.2

1.251.3

PD

F U

ncer

tain

ty p

arto

n lu

mis

- L

HC

7 T

eV -

Rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

=0.

119

sα

MS

TW

08 N

NLO

PD

F U

ncer

tain

ty p

arto

n lu

mis

- L

HC

7 T

eV -

Rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

(N

N

PD

F,2011)

�

NNPDF2.1

NLO

VSNNLO

!

STABILITY

�

NNPDF2.1

VSMSTW08

!GOOD

AGREEMENT

INEW

M

x

�

100

GEV

REGIO

N,

BUTMSTW

GLUON

UNSTABLE

AT

SMALL

x

CONTIN

UOUSPROGRESS

THE

HIG

GS

CROSS

SECTIO

N

m

H

=

120

GEV:2010

m

H

=

120

GEV:2011

(G

.W

att)

HIG

GSWG

NLO

2010

[GeV

]H

M

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

R 0.850.9

0.95

1

1.051.

1

1.15

LHC HIGGS XS WG 2010

LHC

7 T

eV 68%

C.L

.s

αP

DF

+no

rmal

ized

to M

ST

W20

08nl

o

)Z

(m sα

diffe

rent

val

ues

of

unc

erta

intie

ss

αex

act P

DF

+

PD

F4L

HC

rec

ipe

NN

PD

F2.

0

CT

EQ

6.6

MS

TW

08nl

o

NLO

2011

ENVELOPE(W

ATT)

NNLO

2011

ENVELOPE(N

NPDF)

( G

eV )

HM

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

( gg -> H ) ) σ R (

0.750.8

0.850.9

0.95

1

1.051.

1

1.151.2

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

(no

NM

C)

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

(N

MC

p S

Fs)

)=0.

119

Z(M sα

LHC

7 T

eV, R

atio

to N

NP

DF

2.1

NN

LO

( G

eV )

HM

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

( gg -> H ) ) σ R (

0.750.8

0.850.9

0.95

1

1.051.

1

1.151.2

)=0.

119

Z(M sα

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

)=0.

117

Z(M sα

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

)=0.

1171

Z(M s

αM

ST

W20

08 N

NLO

)=0.

1135

Z(M sα

AB

KM

09 N

NLO

�

NLO:2010

!

2011

IMPROVED

AGREEMENT

OF

GLOBAL

FITS

�

NNLO:MSTWN

NPDF

AGREEMENT

ALMOST

PERFECT

ISSUES

PDFUNCERTAIN

TIE

S:

DO

THEYHAVE

ASTATISTIC

ALMEANIN

G?

SOMETIM

ES

STATED

THAT“P

DF

UNCERTAIN

TIE

SARE

THEORETIC

AL

UNCERTAIN

TIE

S”(THUS

DEVOID

OF

STATISTIC

ALMEANIN

G)IS

ITTRUE?

)

hO

inew

=

R O[f℄P new(f)Df;=

N

�

R O[f℄P(�2 jf)P old(f)D

f;

hO

inew

=

1

Nrep

P N rep k=1

N

�P

(�2jfk)O

[fk℄=

1

Nrep

P N rep k=1

w

k

O

[fk℄

w

k

=

N

(�2 k)n=2�1e�

1 2�2 k

)

(de

Lorenzi,M

N

ulty,2010-2011))

� � �

)

PDFUNCERTAIN

TIE

S:

DO

THEYHAVE

ASTATISTIC

ALMEANIN

G?

SOMETIM

ES

STATED

THAT“P

DF

UNCERTAIN

TIE

SARE

THEORETIC

AL

UNCERTAIN

TIE

S”(THUS

DEVOID

OF

STATISTIC

ALMEANIN

G)IS

ITTRUE?

AWAY

OF

TESTIN

G:

NEW

DATA

)

BAYES’THEOREM

hO

inew

=

R O[f℄P new(f)Df;=

N

�

R O[f℄P(�2 jf)P old(f)D

f;

INAM

ONTECARLO

APPROACH...

hO

inew

=

1

Nrep

P N rep k=1

N

�P

(�2jfk)O

[fk℄=

1

Nrep

P N rep k=1

w

k

O

[fk℄

,w

k

=

N

(�2 k)n=2�1e�

1 2�2 k

)

EFFECT

OF

NEW

DATA

ISACCOUNTED

FOR

BY

REWEIG

HTIN

GMONTE

CARLO

AVERAGES

(CAN

ALSO

BE

IMPLEMENTED

INH

ESSIA

NFRAMEWORK

(de

Lorenzi,M

N

ulty,2010-2011))

�

DETERMIN

EPDFS

INCLUDIN

GSOME

DATA

BYBAYES’THEOREM

(REWEIG

HTIN

G)

�

DETERMIN

EPDFS

BY

ENLARGIN

GTHE

DATASET

TO

THE

NEW

DATA

(REFITTIN

G)

�

COMPARE

RESULTS

)

IFTHEY

AGREE,PDFS

DO

HAVE

ASTATISTIC

AL

INTERPRETATIO

NS

ALRIG

HT!

RUNNIN

GTHE

TEST

INCLUSIO

NOF

JET

DATA:REWEIG

HTIN

GVS.REFITTIN

GNNPDF2.0DIS+DY

VS.NNPDF2.0

FULL

GLUON

x0.

10.

20.

30.

40.

50.

60.

70.

80.

9

)02

xg(x, Q -0.10

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

NN

PD

F2.

0 (D

IS+D

YP

)

NN

PD

F2.

0 (D

IS+D

YP

) +

rw J

ET

NN

PD

F2.

0

GLUON

UNCERTAIN

TY

x0.

10.

20.

30.

40.

50.

60.

70.

80.

9

)02

Abs.er.(xg) (x, Q

0

0.050.

1

0.150.

2

0.25

NN

PD

F2.

0 (D

IS+D

YP

)

NN

PD

F2.

0 (D

IS+D

YP

) +

rw J

ET

NN

PD

F2.

0

DIS

TANCES

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

0 0

.1 0

.2 0

.3 0

.4 0

.5 0

.6 0

.7 0

.8 0

.9

d[ q(x,Q02) ]

x

Dis

tanc

e be

twee

n ce

ntra

l val

ues

NN

PD

F2.

0 vs

. NN

PD

F2.

0 D

IS+

DY

P +

Jet

s(R

W)

(100

)Σ g T3 V ∆ S s + s -

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 1e-

05 0

.000

1 0

.001

0.0

1 0

.1 1

d[ q(x,Q02) ]

x

Dis

tanc

e be

twee

n ce

ntra

l val

ues

NN

PD

F2.

0 vs

. NN

PD

F2.

0 D

IS+

DY

P +

Jet

s(R

W)

(100

)Σ g T3 V ∆ S s + s -

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

0 0

.1 0

.2 0

.3 0

.4 0

.5 0

.6 0

.7 0

.8 0

.9

d[ σq(x,Q02) ]

x

Dis

tanc

e be

twee

n P

DF

unc

erta

intie

s

NN

PD

F2.

0 vs

. NN

PD

F2.

0 D

IS+

DY

P +

Jet

s(R

W)

(100

)Σ g T3 V ∆ S s + s -

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 1e-

05 0

.000

1 0

.001

0.0

1 0

.1 1

d[ σq(x,Q02) ]

x

Dis

tanc

e be

twee

n P

DF

unc

erta

intie

s

NN

PD

F2.

0 vs

. NN

PD

F2.

0 D

IS+

DY

P +

Jet

s(R

W)

(100

)Σ g T3 V ∆ S s + s -

d

�

1

)

STATIS

TIC

ALEQUIVALENCE

( d=

n

,

n

�

DIS

CREPANCY)

STATISTIC

AL

INTERPRETATIO

NVALID

ATED

DATACONSISTENCY:WHYWE

NEED

IT

�

DIS

ONLY

FIT

)

SIG

NIFIC

ANT

LOSS

IN

ACCURACY

�

LARGE

x

GLUON:

NEED

JETS!

�

LIG

HT

AND

STRANGE

FLAVOUR

SEPARA

TIO

N:

NEED

DRELLY

AN

AND

W

PRODUCTIO

N

GLUON

VALENCE

SEA

ASYM:

�u

�

� d

STRANGE:

s

�

�s

AHERA

ONLY

FIT

ISA

TERRIB

LE

IDEA!

DATACONSISTENCY:HOW

TO

TESTFOR

IT

�

INCONSISTENT

DATA

,

UNDERESTIM

ATED

UNCERTAIN

TIE

S

�

RESCALE

ALL

UNCERTAIN

TIE

SIN

AGIV

EN

EXPERIM

ENT

BY

SOME

FACTOR

�:

�

2 �

=

�

2=�

2

(TOLERANCE)

�

DETERMIN

EPROBABILITY

DISTRIB

UTIO

NOF

�

VALUES

BYBAYES’THEOREM

)

REWEIG

HTIN

G:

P

(�

)

=

N �

P N k=

1

w

k(�

):

JETS

α0

12

34

5

) α P(

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5)

αP

()

αP

(D0

e

INCLUSIV

E

α0

12

34

5

) α P(

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.080.

1

0.12

0.14

0.16)

αP

()

αP

(D0

e

HIG

H

E

T

α0

12

34

5

) α P(

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.080.

1

0.12

0.14)

αP

()

αP

(

�

JETS:

)

CONSIS

TENT

DATA

�

W

�

CHARGE

ASYMMETRIE

S,D0

INCLUSIV

E

e

DATA

)

UNCERTAIN

TIE

SUNDERESTIM

ATED

BY

�

70%

(PROB.PEAKS

AT

�

�

1:7

)

�

W

�

CHARGE

ASYMMETRIE

S,D0

e

DATA

WITH

E

T

>

35

GEV

)

INCONSIS

TENT

DATA

THE

IMPACTOFHADRON

COLLID

ER

DATA

JETS

AT

THETEVATRON

�

GOOD

CONSISTENCY

)

ONEJ

ETIN

CLUSIV

ERUN

IIDATA

WELL

REPRODUCED

EVEN

WHEN

NOT

FITTED

(LARGE

x

GLUON

WELL

DETERMIN

ED

BY

SCALIN

GVIO

LATIO

NS)

�

IMPACT

ON

LARGE

x

GLUON

�

SIG

NIFIC

ANTIM

PROVEMENTIN

GLUON

ACCURACY

FOR

0:1

�<

x

�<

0:7

x-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

101

]2

[ GeV2

T / p2

/ M2

Q

1

10

210

310

410

510

610

NM

C-p

dN

MC

SLA

CB

CD

MS

HE

RA

I-A

VC

HO

RU

SF

LH10

8N

TV

DM

NZ

EU

S-H

2D

YE

605

DY

E88

6C

DF

WA

SY

CD

FZ

RA

PD

0ZR

AP

CD

FR

2KT

D0R

2CO

N

NN

PD

F2.

0 da

tase

t

GLUON

x0.

10.

20.

30.

40.

50.

60.

70.

80.

91

)0

2xg (x, Q

-0.10

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

NN

PD

F2.

0 -

DIS

NN

PD

F1.

2 -

DIS

+ J

ET

GLUON

UNCERTAIN

TY

x0.

10.

20.

30.

40.

50.

60.

70.

80.

9

)02

Abs.er.(xg) (x, Q

0

0.050.

1

0.150.

2

0.25

NN

PD

F2.

0 (D

IS+D

YP

)

NN

PD

F2.

0 (D

IS+D

YP

) +

rw J

ET

NN

PD

F2.

0

TEVATROND

RELLY

AN+

W

,

Z

PRODUCTIO

N

�

VERY

SUBSTANTIA

LIM

PROVEMENT

INFIT

QUALITY

WHEN

DATA

INCLUDED

)

SOMEPDF

COMBIN

ATIO

NS

POORLY

DETERMIN

ED

WITHOUT

THESE

DATA

�

HUGE

IMPROVEMENT

INSEA

ASYM

�u

�

� d

&STRANGENESS

s

�

�s

�

SIG

NIFIC

ANT

IMPROVEMENT

INTOTAL

VALENCE

(P i(qi�

�qi)

)&

ISOTRIPLET(u

+

�u

�

(d

+

� d)

)

x-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

101

]2

[ GeV2

T / p2

/ M2

Q

1

10

210

310

410

510

610

NM

C-p

dN

MC

SLA

CB

CD

MS

HE

RA

I-A

VC

HO

RU

SF

LH10

8N

TV

DM

NZ

EU

S-H

2D

YE

605

DY

E88

6C

DF

WA

SY

CD

FZ

RA

PD

0ZR

AP

CD

FR

2KT

D0R

2CO

N

NN

PD

F2.

0 da

tase

t

ISOTRIPLET

x0.

10.

20.

30.

40.

50.

60.

70.

80.

91

) 0

2 (x, Q 3 xT

0

0.050.

1

0.150.2

0.250.3

0.350.4

0.450.5

NN

PD

F2.

0 D

IS+J

ET

NN

PD

F2.

0

� d

�

�ux

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

)0

2 (x, Q S ∆x

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

NN

PD

F2.

0 D

IS+J

ET

NN

PD

F2.

0

VALENCE

x0.

10.

20.

30.

40.

50.

60.

70.

80.

91

)0

2xV (x, Q

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.81

1.2

NN

PD

F2.

0 D

IS+J

ET

NN

PD

F2.

0

s

�

�s

x0.

10.

20.

30.

40.

50.

60.

70.

80.

91

)0

2 (x, Q - xs -0

.02

-0.0

10

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

NN

PD

F2.

0 D

IS+J

ET

NN

PD

F2.

0

TEVATRON

VSDIS

:CONSISTENCY

ISSUES?

DIS

VSDIS+DY:

ANTID

OWN

x0.

10.

20.

30.

40.

50.

60.

70.

80.

9

xdbar

0.6

0.81

1.2

1.4

1.6

, rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

12

GeV

4 =

10

2Q

NN

PD

F2.

1

NN

PD

F2.

1 D

IS

, rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

12

GeV

4 =

10

2Q

COMPARIS

ON

BETWEEN

SETS:

u=d

AT

Q

2

=

2

GEV

2

x0.

10.

20.

30.

40.

50.

60.

7

)2

0 d / u ( x , Q

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.91

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

Rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

0

NN

PD

F2.

0

CT

10

MS

TW

08

Rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

0

�

DOWN

AND

UP/DOWN:

TENSIO

N

BETWEENDIS

ANDDY

DATA

�

PERHAPS

NUCLEAR

CORRECTIO

NS

&HIG

HER

TWIS

TS

PLAY

AROLE

IN

NMC,BCDMSDIS

�

DIFFERENTPDF

SETS

INPARTIA

L

DIS

AGREEMENT

TEVATRON

RUNII

W

ASYMMETRY

DATA

�

CTEQ:NO

GLOBALLY

CONSIS

TENT

FIT

FOUND:

CT10W

WITH

W

DATA,CT10

WITHOUT

�

NNPDF:

SIZABLE

REDUCTIO

NIN

UNCERTAIN

TY

u=d

AT

Q

2

=

2

GEV

2

x0.

10.

20.

30.

40.

50.

60.

7

)2

0 d / u ( x , Q 0.750.8

0.850.9

0.95

1

1.051.

1

1.151.2

Rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

0

NN

PD

F2.

0

NN

PD

F2.

0 +

eBin

A +

mu

CT

10

CT

10W

Rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

0

RELATIV

EUNCERTAIN

TY

x0.

10.

20.

30.

40.

50.

60.

7

) ]2

0 RelErr [ d / u ( x , Q

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.080.

1

0.12

NN

PD

F2.

0

NN

PD

F2.

0 +

eBin

A +

mu

CT

10

CT

10W

�

W

ASYMMETRY

DATA

DETERMIN

ETHE

u=d

RATIO

ACCURATELY,TENSIO

NWITHDIS

DATA

�

BETTER

TO

DO

WITHOUTNMC/BCDMS

DATA(N

OLOW

Q

2

DATA,NO

NUCLEAR

TARGETS)

PRECISIO

NPHYSIC

SAT

THE

LHC

COLLID

ER

ONLYFITS?

NO

FIX

ED

TARGET

DATA

,

NO

LOWE

NERGY

TROUBLE

THENNPDF2.1

DATASET

NNPDF2.1

COLLID

ER

ONLY

PDFS

FROM

HERA+TEVATRON

DATA?

COLLID

ER

ONLYFITS?

THEPDFS

GLUON

VALENCE

SEA

ASYM:

�u

�

� d

STRANGE:

s

�

�s

�

GOOD

ACCURACY

FOR

GLUON

�

GREAT

LOSS

OF

ACCURACY

FOR

FLAVOR

SEPARATIO

N

COLLID

ER

ONLYFITS?

NO

FIX

ED

TARGET

DATA

,

NO

LOWE

NERGY

TROUBLE

THENNPDF2.1

DATASET

COLLID

ER

ONLYFITS?

NO

FIX

ED

TARGET

DATA

,

NO

LOWE

NERGY

TROUBLE

THENNPDF2.1

DATASET

NNPDF2.1

COLL.ONLY+LHC

LHC

DATA

CAN

PROVID

ETHE

MISSIN

GIN

FORMATIO

N!

W

AND

Z

PRODUCTIO

NAT

THELHC

�

W

�

,

Z

RAPID

ITY

DISTRIB

UTIO

NS

MEASURED

BYATLAS

WITH

j�j<

2:4;

3:2

,

36

pb�

1

,FULLY

CORRELATED

SYSTEMATIC

S

�

CMS,SAME

KIN.,

SYST.YET

UNAVAILABLE,MUON

ASYMMETRIE

SW.234

pb�

1

�

LHCB,

2

<

�j<

4:5

,36

pb�

1

,SYST.YET

UNAVAILABLE

FIT

QUALITY:PDF

SETS

DATASET

�2

NNPDF2.1

�2

MSTW08

�2

HERAPDF1.5

ATLAS

W

+

36

PB

�1

5.7

6.5

5.3

ATLAS

W

�

36

PB

�1

2.5

4.1

6.4

ATLAS

Z

36

PB

�1

1.8

3.7

2.9

CMS

Z

RAPID

ITY36

PB

�1

1.9

2.9

3.0

CMS

MUON

ASYMMETRY234

PB

�1

2.0

3.4

2.1

LHCB

Z

RAPID

ITY36

PB

�1

1.1

0.7

0.8

LHCB

W

LEPTON

ASYMMETRY36

PB

�1

0.5

0.6

0.5

�

CONSID

ERABLE

DIS

CRIM

INATIN

GPOWER(B

IGDIFFERENCES

BETWEEN

SETS)

�

CORRELATED

SYSTEMATIC

SCRUCIA

L(O

THERWISE

WASHES

OUT

DIFFERENCES)

W

AND

Z

PRODUCTIO

NAT

THELHC

FITTIN

GTHEATLAS

DATA

lη0

0.5

11.

52

2.5

( pb )l η ) / d

+ ( W σd

500

520

540

560

580

600

620

640

660

680

700

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

+ D

YN

NLO

NN

PD

F2.

1

-1N

NP

DF

2.1

+ A

TLA

S W

,Z 3

6 pb

Dat

a-1

36

pb+

AT

LAS

W

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

+ D

YN

NLO

Zη0

0.5

11.

52

2.5

3

( pb ) Z η ( Z ) / d σd

405060708090

100

110

120

130

140

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

+ D

YN

NLO

NN

PD

F2.

1

-1N

NP

DF

2.1

+ A

TLA

S W

,Z 3

6 pb

Dat

a-1

AT

LAS

Z 3

6 pb

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

+ D

YN

NLO

IMPACT

ON

LIG

HT

QUARKPDFS

DOWN

x-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

10

R [ xd ] 0.850.9

0.95

1

1.051.

1

1.151.2

1.25

, rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

2 G

eV4

= 1

02

Q

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

Dat

a-1

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

+ A

TLA

S W

,Z 3

6 pb

, rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

2 G

eV4

= 1

02

Q

ANTIU

P

x-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

10

R [ xubar ] 0.850.9

0.95

1

1.051.

1

1.151.2

1.25

, rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

2 G

eV4

= 1

02

Q

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

Dat

a-1

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

+ A

TLA

S W

,Z 3

6 pb

, rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

NLO

2 G

eV4

= 1

02

Q

(N

N

PD

F,2012

prelim

.)

�

SIG

NIFIC

ANT

IMPACT

ON

THE

SHAPE

�

SIZABLE

REDUCTIO

NOF

THE

UNCERTAIN

TY

W

+

PRODUCTIO

NAT

THELHC

�

STRANGENESS

PROBED

DI

RECTLY

�

MIG

HT

REPLACE

NEUTRIN

ODATA

THECMS

MEASUREMENT

R

�

�

�(W

+

+� )

�(W

�

+ )

;

R

�

�(W

+ )

�(W

+jets)

R

�

=

0:92

�

0:19stat.�

0:04syst.

R

=

0:143

�

0:015stat.�

0:024syst.

R

�

DATA

VS

TH.

R

DATA

VS

TH.

TOTAL

STRANGENESS

x0.

10.

20.

30.

40.

50.

60.

70.

80.

91

)0

2 (x, Q + xs

0

0.050.

1

0.150.2

0.25

NN

PD

F2.

1

CT

10

MS

TW

08

�

DIFFERENCES

BETWEEN

AVAILABLE

SETS

SIZABLE

�

DATA

STILLTOO

IMPRECIS

E,BUT...

W

+

PRODUCTIO

NAT

THELHC

�

SIM

ULATED

MEASUREMENT

OF

RAPID

ITY

DISTRIB

UTIO

NWITH

AMC@NLO

(J.R

ojo,S.Frixione,M

.M

angano,2012,prelim

.)

�

CMS

KIN

EMATIC

S

pjet

T

>

20

G

eV

,

p� T

>

25

G

eV

�jet;

��

<

2:1

�

15%

CHARM

TAGGIN

GEFFIC

IENCY(C

MS)

�

CURRENTLY36

PB

�

1

,BUT5

FB

�

1

SUFFIC

IENT

THE

IMPACT

ON

STRANGENESS

INTHENNPDF2.1

FIT

INTHE

COLLID

ERO

NLY

FIT

�

IMPACT

SIG

NIFIC

ANT

EVEN

ON

CURRENT

GLOBAL

FIT

�

COULD

DO

WITHOUT

NEUTRIN

ODATA

PROMPT

PHOTON

PRODUCTIO

N

(D

.d'Enterria,J.R

ojo,2012,prelim

.)

�

DIR

ECTPROBE

OFTHE

qg

LUMIN

OSITY

�

MEASURED

BYCMS+ATLAS

xt

=

x1x2

RANGE

Tx-3

10-2

10-1

101

data / NLO

0

0.51

1.52

2.5

pro

duct

ion:

γIs

olat

ed

= 2

.76,

7 T

eVs

LHC

pp,

= 1

.8, 1

.96

TeV

s, p

Teva

tron

p

= 5

46, 6

30 G

eVs

, pS

,Tev

atro

n p

pS

p

= 2

00 G

eVs

RH

IC p

p,

JET

PH

OX

1.3

γ T =

pR

,F,F

FµN

NP

DF

2.1

THE

IMPACT

OFLHC

PROMPT

PHOTON

DATA

GLUON

x-3

10-2

10-1

10

Ratio of Gluon PDFs 0.850.9

0.95

1

1.051.

1

1.151.2

2 =

10

GeV

2 Q

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

LO

NN

PD

F2.

1 N

LO +

LH

C7

IsoP

hoto

ns

2 =

10

GeV

2 Q

HIG

GS

FROM

GLUON

FUSIO

N

( G

eV )

HM

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Ratio to NNPDF2.1

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

1.081.

1

Hig

gs g

gF N

LO c

ross

sec

tion

(MC

FM

)

NN

PD

F2.

1

NN

PD

F2.

1 +

LH

C Is

oPho

tons

Hig

gs g

gF N

LO c

ross

sec

tion

(MC

FM

)

�

MODERATE

IMPACT

ON

GLOBAL

FIT

(BUT

COULD

RESOLVE

DIS

CREPANCIE

S)

�

SUFFIC

IENT

TO

AFFECT

HIG

GS

CROSS

SECTIO

N

OUTLOOK

WIS

HLIS

T

,

ROADMAP

�

PRECISIO

NLHC

PHYSIC

SMUST

USE

PRECISELHC

DATA

�

A“C

OLLID

ER

ONLY”HERA+LHC

PDF

FIT

(TEVATRON

DATA

MIG

HT

BE

SUPERFLUOUS)

{

MEDIU

M&

LARGE

x

GLUON

�

PROMPT

PHOTONS

�

(PRECIS

ION)JETS

�

INCLUSIV

E

W

pT

DIS

TRIB

UTIO

NS

{

LIG

HT

FLAVOR

SEPARATIO

N

�

LOW–MASSDRELLY

AN

�

HIG

H–MASSDRELLY

AN

�

Z

RAPID

ITY

DIS

TRIB

UTIO

NS

�

W

ASYMMETRIE

S

{

STRANGENES&

HEAVY

FLAVORS

�

STRANGENESS

)

W

+

�

CHARM

)

Z

+

,

+

�

BOTTOM

Z

+

b

�

MOST

OF

THESE

ALREADY

AVAILABLE(A

TLEAST

INPRELIM

.FORM)

�

ATLAS

JETS

AND

W

,Z

RAP.DISTNS.FULLY

AVAILABLE(36

PB

�

1

)

FOR

DIS

COVERY,WE

NEED

TO

TRUST

OUR

SIG

NAL!

EXTRAS

NMC

DATA:A

PROBLEM?

�

NMC

PROTON

AND

DEUTERON

DATA

FORDIS

F

2

STRUCTURE

FUNCTIO

N

�

F

2

STRUCTURE

FUNCTIO

NDATA

USED

INMSTW,CTEQ,NNPDF

FITS,

WOULD

THE

USE

OF

CROSS

SECTIO

NDATA

MAKE

ADIFFERENCE?

(A

lekhin,

B

l�um

lein,

M

o h,

2011)

e�(x;y;Q2 )=F 2(x;Q

2)

� 2

�

2y

+

y2=[1

+

R

(x;Q

2)℄

�

(N

LO

:arXiv:1102.3182;N

N

LO

:prelim

inary)

NMC

DATA:A

PROBLEM?

�

NMC

PROTON

AND

DEUTERON

DATA

FORDIS

F

2

STRUCTURE

FUNCTIO

N

�

F

2

STRUCTURE

FUNCTIO

NDATA

USED

INMSTW,CTEQ,NNPDF

FITS,

WOULD

THE

USE

OF

CROSS

SECTIO

NDATA

MAKE

ADIFFERENCE?

(A

lekhin,

B

l�um

lein,

M

o h,

2011)

e�(x;y;Q2 )=F 2(x;Q

2)

� 2

�

2y

+

y2=[1

+

R

(x;Q

2)℄

�NNPDF

FIT

REPEATED

WITHNMC

XSECT

OR

NONMC

(N

LO

:arXiv:1102.3182;N

N

LO

:prelim

inary)

EFFECT

ON

GLUON

x-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

10

)]2

R[g (x, Q 0.850.9

0.95

1

1.051.

1

1.151.2

1.25

2 G

eV4

= 1

02

Rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

1, Q

NN

PD

F2.

1

NN

PD

F2.

1-N

MC

xsec

NN

PD

F2.

1-no

NM

C

2 G

eV4

= 1

02

Rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

1, Q

EFFECT

ONHIG

GS

XSECT

[ G

eV ]

HM

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

280

300

320

( H -> gg ) ) σ R (

0.9

0.95

1

1.051.

1

1.15

NN

LO g

g->H

pro

duct

ion,

Rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

5 (T

MP

)

NN

PD

F2.

5 N

NLO

(TM

P)

NM

C-X

SE

C

NN

PD

F2.

5 N

NLO

(TM

P)

NM

C S

F

NN

LO g

g->H

pro

duct

ion,

Rat

io to

NN

PD

F2.

5 (T

MP

)

NO

SIG

NIFIC

ANTCHANGE

OBSERVED

NMC

DATA:A

PROBLEM?

ACLOSER

LOOK

�

ALEKHIN

ET

AL.SEE

LARGE

SHIFT

INBESTF

IT

�

s

:FROM

0.1170(N

MC

F

2

)TO

0.1135(N

MC

�

s

)

�

HOW

MUCH

OF

THEIR

CHANGE

INH

IGGS

XSECT(�

8%

)DUE

TO

CHANGE

IN

�

s

?

�

BASED

ON

POWER

COUNTIN

G,EXPECT

2:8�

�

s

=

8%

(!)

�

EITHER

REMOVENMC

DATA,OR

CHANGE

VALUE

OF

�

s

INMSTW

FIT

(Thorne,presented

by

W

att

at

P

D

F

4LH

C

2011

):

{ {

�

s

{

�

s

=

0:113

NMC

DATA:A

PROBLEM?

ACLOSER

LOOK

�

ALEKHIN

ET

AL.SEE

LARGE

SHIFT

INBESTF

IT

�

s

:FROM

0.1170(N

MC

F

2

)TO

0.1135(N

MC

�

s

)

�

HOW

MUCH

OF

THEIR

CHANGE

INH

IGGS

XSECT(�

8%

)DUE

TO

CHANGE

IN

�

s

?

�

BASED

ON

POWER

COUNTIN

G,EXPECT

2:8�

�

s

=

8%

(!)

�

EITHER

REMOVENMC

DATA,OR

CHANGE

VALUE

OF

�

s

INMSTW

FIT

(Thorne,presented

by

W

att

at

P

D

F

4LH

C

2011

):

{

IMPACT

OFNMC

DATA

NEGLIG

IBLE

{

IMPACT

OF

�

s

VALUE

COMPARABLE(S

OMEWHAT

SMALLER)TO

WHOLEABKM

EFFECT

{

MSTW

ANDABKM

RESULTS

STILL

QUITE

DIFFERENT

EVEN

FOR

SAME

�

s

=

0:113

THE

VALUE

OF

�

s

�

DEDIC

ATEDM

UNIC

HMEETIN

G(F

EB2011):

S.BETHKE

PROPOSES

TWO

UPDATED

VALUES:

{

(1)

�

s

=

0:1174

�

0:0011

{

(2)

�

s

=

0:1187

�

0:0006

{

BOTH

INCLUDE

NEW

VALUE

FROM

�

DECAYS

�

s

=

0:1213

�

0:0014

(WAS

�

s

=

0:1197

�

0:0016

)

{

VALUE(1)ALSO

INCLUDES

NEW

SCET

VALUE

FROM

e+

e�

THRUST

(A

bbate

et

al.,2010)

�

s

=

0:1135

�

0:0010

,BUT

ALL

UNCERTAIN

TIE

SRESCALED

BY

FACTOR2

{

VALUE(2)EXCLUDES

IT

�

AVERAGIN

GTHE

TWO

MOST

RELIA

BLE

VALUES(G

LOBALEW

FIT

&

�

,BOTH

N

3

LO,NO

DEP.ON

HADRON

STRUCTURE)GIV

ES

�

s

=

0:1209

�

0:0013

�

0

:0

0

2

THE

VALUE

OF

�

s

�

DEDIC

ATEDM

UNIC

HMEETIN

G(F

EB2011):

S.BETHKE

PROPOSES

TWO

UPDATED

VALUES:

{

(1)

�

s

=

0:1174

�

0:0011

{

(2)

�

s

=

0:1187

�

0:0006

{

BOTH

INCLUDE

NEW

VALUE

FROM

�

DECAYS

�

s

=

0:1213

�

0:0014

(WAS

�

s

=

0:1197

�

0:0016

)

{

VALUE(1)ALSO

INCLUDES

NEW

SCET

VALUE

FROM

e+

e�

THRUST

(A

bbate

et

al.,2010)

�

s

=

0:1135

�

0:0010

,BUT

ALL

UNCERTAIN

TIE

SRESCALED

BY

FACTOR2

{

VALUE(2)EXCLUDES

IT

�

AVERAGIN

GTHE

TWO

MOST

RELIA

BLE

VALUES(G

LOBALEW

FIT

&

�

,BOTH

N

3

LO,NO

DEP.ON

HADRON

STRUCTURE)GIV

ES

�

s

=

0:1209

�

0:0013

�

UNCERTAIN

TY

LARGER

THAN

0

:0

0

2

QUITE

UNLIK

ELY

METHODOLOGY:“S

TANDARD”(H

ESSIA

N)APPROACH

THE

TOLERANCE

PROBLEM

�

CHOOSE

AFIX

ED

FUNCTIO

NAL

FORM

(�25

�

30

PARMS.GLOBALLY)AND

FIT

PARMS

TO

DATA

�

UNCERTAIN

TIE

SDETERMIN

ED

FROM

HESSIA

NMATRIX

AT

MIN

IMUM

�

STANDARD

�

�2

=

1

BANDS

TOO

NARROW

)

LARGE

DIS

CREPANCIE

SFOR

INDIV

IDUAL

EXPERIM

ENTS

�

TOLERANCE

)

ENVELOPE

OF

UNCERTAIN

TIE

SOF

EXPERIM

ENTS

�

DYNAMIC

AL

)

SEPARATELY

DETERMIN

ED

FOR

EACH

HESSIA

NEIG

ENVECTOR

MIN

IMUM

�2 i

VS

GLOBAL

�2

C

ollins,Pum

plin

2001

CTEQ

TOLERANCE

PLOT

FOR4TH

EIG

ENVEC.

-30

-20

-10010203040

distance

Eig

enve

ctor

4

BCDMSp

BCDMSd

H1a

H1b

ZEUS

NMCp

NMCr

CCFR2

CCFR3

E605

CDFw

E866

D0jet

CDFjet

MSTW

TOLERANCE

PLOT

FOR13TH

EIG

ENVEC.

2p F µ BCDMS

2d F µ BCDMS

2p F µ NMC

2d F µ NMC

pµ n/ µ NMC

2p F µ E665

2d F µ E665

2 SLAC ep F

2 SLAC ed F

L NMC/BCDMS/SLAC F

E866/NuSea pp DY

E866/NuSea pd/pp DY

2 N F ν NuTeV

2 N F ν CHORUS

3 N xF ν NuTeV

3 N xF ν CHORUS

Xµµ →Nν CCFR

Xµµ →Nν NuTeV NCr σ H1 ep 97-00 NCr σ ZEUS ep 95-00 CCr σ H1 ep 99-00 CCr σ ZEUS ep 99-00

charm

2 H1/ZEUS ep FH1 ep 99-00 incl. jets

ZEUS ep 96-00 incl. jets

incl. jets p II p ∅ D

incl. jets p CDF II p

asym. νl → II W ∅ D

asym. νl → CDF II W

II Z rap. ∅ D

CDF II Z rap.

2p F µ BCDMS

2d F µ BCDMS

2p F µ NMC

2d F µ NMC

pµ n/ µ NMC

2p F µ E665

2d F µ E665

2 SLAC ep F

2 SLAC ed F

L NMC/BCDMS/SLAC F

E866/NuSea pp DY

E866/NuSea pd/pp DY

2 N F ν NuTeV

2 N F ν CHORUS

3 N xF ν NuTeV

3 N xF ν CHORUS

Xµµ →Nν CCFR

Xµµ →Nν NuTeV NCr σ H1 ep 97-00 NCr σ ZEUS ep 95-00 CCr σ H1 ep 99-00 CCr σ ZEUS ep 99-00

charm

2 H1/ZEUS ep FH1 ep 99-00 incl. jets

ZEUS ep 96-00 incl. jets

incl. jets p II p ∅ D

incl. jets p CDF II p

asym. νl → II W ∅ D

asym. νl → CDF II W

II Z rap. ∅ D

CDF II Z rap.

global2

χ∆ Distance =

-20

-15

-10-505101520

68%

C.L

.

68%

C.L

.

90%

C.L

.

90%

C.L

.

MS

TW

200

8 N

LO P

DF

fit

Eig

enve

ctor

num

ber

13

GLOBALMSTW

TOLERANCE E

igen

vect

or n

umbe

r

12

34

56

78

910

1112

1314

1516

1718

1920

12

34

56

78

910

1112

1314

1516

1718

1920

global2

χ∆ Tolerance T =

-20

-15

-10-505101520

(M

RS

T)

50+

(M

RS

T)

50-

(C

TE

Q)

100

+

(C

TE

Q)

100

-

NCr σ H1 ep 97-00

NCr σ H1 ep 97-00

2 d F µ NMC Xµµ →Nν NuTeV

Xµµ →Nν NuTeV Xµµ →Nν CCFR

E866/NuSea pd/pp DY E866/NuSea pd/pp DY

Xµµ →Nν NuTeV 3 N xF ν NuTeV

Xµµ →Nν NuTeV Xµµ →Nν NuTeV

asym. νl → II W ∅ D 2 d F µ BCDMS

2 d F µ BCDMS 2 p F µ BCDMS

NCr σ H1 ep 97-00

NCr σ ZEUS ep 95-00

2 d F µ BCDMS 2 SLAC ed F

NCr σ H1 ep 97-00

NCr σ ZEUS ep 95-00

E866/NuSea pd/pp DY E866/NuSea pd/pp DY

E866/NuSea pp DY 3 N xF ν NuTeV

2 d F µ NMC asym. νl → II W ∅ D

NCr σ H1 ep 97-00 2 N F ν NuTeV

Xµµ →Nν CCFR E866/NuSea pd/pp DY

Xµµ →Nν NuTeV Xµµ →Nν CCFR

asym. νl → II W ∅ D E866/NuSea pd/pp DY

NCr σ H1 ep 97-00

NCr σ H1 ep 97-00

3 N xF ν NuTeV Xµµ →Nν NuTeV

MS

TW

200

8 N

LO P

DF

fit

METHODOLOGY:NNPDF

APPROACH

BASIC

IDEA:MONTE

CARLO

SAMPLIN

G

OF

THE

PROBABILITY

MEASURE

INTHE(F

UNCTIO

N)SPACE

OFPDFS

�

START

FROM

MONTE

CARLO

SAMPLIN

GOF

DATA

SPACE

�

EACH

PDF

$

NEURAL

NETWORK

PARAMETRIZED

BY37

PARAMETERS( N

NPDF2.0:

37

7

=

259

PARMS)

“INFIN

ITE”NUMBER

OF

PARAMETERS

)

CAN

REP

RESENT

ANY

FUNCTIO

N

�

FIT

STOPS

WHEN

QUALITY

OF

FIT

TO

RAN

DOMLY

SELECTED

“VALID

ATIO

N”

DATA(N

OT

FIT

TED)STOPS

IMPROVIN

G

Experimental Data

MC generation

NN parametrization

Fi i=1,...,Ndata

NMC,BCDMS,SLAC,HERA,CHORUS...

Fi(1)

Fi(2)

Fi(N)

Fi(N-1)

q0net(1)

q0net(2)

q0net(N-1)q0net(N)

REPRESENTATION OF

PROBABILITY DENSITY

EVOLUTION

TRAINING

METHODOLOGY:NNPDF

APPROACH

BASIC

IDEA:MONTE

CARLO

SAMPLIN

G

OF

THE

PROBABILITY

MEASURE

INTHE(F

UNCTIO

N)SPACE

OFPDFS

�

START

FROM

MONTE

CARLO

SAMPLIN

GOF

DATA

SPACE

�

EACH

PDF

$

NEURAL

NETWORK

PARAMETRIZED

BY37

PARAMETERS( N

NPDF2.0:

37

7

=

259

PARMS)

“INFIN

ITE”NUMBER

OF

PARAMETERS

)

CAN

REP

RESENT

ANY

FUNCTIO

N

�

FIT

STOPS

WHEN

QUALITY

OF

FIT

TO

RAN

DOMLY

SELECTED

“VALID

ATIO

N”

DATA(N

OT

FIT

TED)STOPS

IMPROVIN

G

CAN

DETERMIN

EBOTH

68C.L.&

1�

x-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

10

)0

2xg (x, Q

-3-2-1012345N

NP

DF

2.0

- 68

% C

L

σN

NP

DF

2.0

- 1-

Indi

vidu

al R

eplic

as

BEYOND

DGLAP?

DIS

COVERIN

GA

NEW

QCD

EFFECTIN

HERA

DATA

IDEA:

(G

�elis,2008,)

C

aola,s.f.

,R

ojo

2010)

�

CUT

OUT

DATA

INTHE“D

ANGEROUS”(S

MALL

x

)

REGIO

N

�

DETERMIN

EPDFS

INTHE“S

AFE”

(LARGE

x

AND

Q

2

)REGIO

N

�

EVOLVE

BACKWARDS

AND

COMPARE

TO

DATA

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

















































xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
















































































xxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxx

xxxxxx

xxxxxx

xxxxxx

� �

x

Q

2

�

x

Q

2

BEYOND

DGLAP?

DIS

COVERIN

GA

NEW

QCD

EFFECTIN

HERA

DATA

IDEA:

(G

�elis,2008,)

C

aola,s.f.

,R

ojo

2010)

�

CUT

OUT

DATA

INTHE“D

ANGEROUS”(S

MALL

x

)

REGIO

N

�

DETERMIN

EPDFS

INTHE“S

AFE”

(LARGE

x

AND

Q

2

)REGIO

N

�

EVOLVE

BACKWARDS

AND

COMPARE

TO

DATA

OLD

HERADATA

BACKWARD

EV.VS

DATA

x

-41

0-3

10

-21

0

)2

=3.5 GeV2

(x,Q 2 F

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.81

1.2

1.4


































































































































Fit w

ith

ou

t cu

tsxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxx

= 0

.5cu

tF

it w

ith A

xxxxxx

xxxxxx

xxxxxx

xxxxxx

= 1

.5cu

tF

it w

ith A

Da

ta

DAT/TH

DIS

T:NO

CUT

DAT/TH

DIS

T:CUT

�

BACKWARD

EVOLVED

FIT

LIE

SSYSTEMATIC

ALLY

BELOW

DATA

�

DATA

AT

LOW

x

AND

Q

2

SHOW

LESS

EVOLUTIO

NTHAN

PREDIC

TED

BYNLO

DGLAP

�

IFLOW

x

AND

Q

2

DATA

INCLUDED,THE

FIT

COMPENSATES

READJUSTIN

GPDFS

Date post:	18-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	4 times
Download:	0 times

TRUCTURE DISCOVERIES , F · CONTINUOUS PROGRESS PARTON LUMINOSITIES (NNLO) GLUON GLUON NNPDF NLO...

Documents