1: % For Phys. Rev. appearance, change preprint to twocolumn.
2: % Choose pra, prb, prc, prd, pre, prl, prstad0tce_hp8150_db, or rmp for journal
3: % Add 'draft' option to mark overfull boxes with black boxes
4: % Add 'showpacs' option to make PACS codes appear
5: %\documentclass[aps,prl,showpacs,twocolumn,lineno,groupedaddress]{revtex4} % for review
6: %\documentclass[aps,preprint,showpacs,groupedaddress]{revtex4} % for double-spaced preprint
7: \documentclass[aps,prl,showpacs,twocolumn,groupedaddress]{revtex4} % for submission
8: \usepackage{graphicx} % needed for figures
9: \usepackage{dcolumn} % needed for some tables
10: \usepackage{bm} % for math
11: \usepackage{amssymb} % for math
12:
13: \begin{document}
14: \input{definitions}
15:
16: % The following information is for internal review, please remove them for submission
17: %\leftline{Version 2.68 as of \today}
18: %\leftline{Primary author: A. Haas}
19: %\leftline{To be submitted to PLB}
20: %\rightline{Comment to {\tt d0-run2eb-020@fnal.gov}}
21: %\rightline{by April 10, 2007}
22:
23: \hspace{5.2in}\mbox{FERMILAB-PUB-07-100-E} %the stopped gluino fermi-preprint number
24:
25: \title{Search for stopped gluinos from \ppbar\ collisions at \1960}
26: \input{list_of_authors_r2.tex} % input Dzero author list
27:
28: \date{May 2, 2007}
29: %\date{\today}
30:
31: \begin{abstract}
32: Long-lived, heavy particles are predicted in a number of models
33: beyond the standard model of particle physics. We present the first
34: direct search for such particles' decays, occurring up to 100 hours
35: after their production and not synchronized with an accelerator
36: bunch crossing. We apply the analysis to the gluino ($\tilde g$),
37: predicted in split supersymmetry, which after hadronization can
38: become charged and lose enough momentum through ionization to come
39: to rest in dense particle detectors. Approximately 410~\ipb\ of
40: \ppbar\ collisions at \1960\ collected with the D0 detector during
41: Run II of the Fermilab Tevatron collider are analyzed in search of
42: such ``stopped gluinos'' decaying into a gluon and a neutralino
43: ($\tilde{\chi}_1^0$), reconstructed as a jet and missing energy. No
44: excess is observed above
45: %the expected
46: background, and limits are placed on the (gluino cross section)
47: $\times$ (probability to stop) $\times$ [BR($\tilde
48: g$\rarrow$g\tilde{\chi}_1^0$)] as a function of the gluino and
49: $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ masses, for gluino lifetimes from 30~$\mu$s --
50: 100 hours.
51: \end{abstract}
52:
53: %Here are the relevant PACS numbers that we can quote in PRL
54: %(http://www.aip.org/pacs/pacs06/pacs0610.html):
55: \pacs{14.80.Ly, 13.85.Rm, 12.60.Jv, 11.30.Pb, 13.85.-t, 14.80.-j}
56:
57: \maketitle
58:
59: Split supersymmetry is a relatively new variant of supersymmetry
60: (SUSY), in which the SUSY scalars are heavy
61: %(possibly near the scale of Grand Unification)
62: compared to the SUSY fermions \cite{Arkani-Hamed:2004yi}. Due to the
63: scalars' high masses, gluino decays are suppressed, and the gluino
64: can be long-lived. Other new models, such as Gauge-mediated SUSY,
65: can also predict a long-lived gluino or other heavy, colored,
66: long-lived particles \cite{Pape:2006ar}. The gluinos hadronize into
67: ``R-hadrons" \cite{rhadron}, colorless bound states of a gluino and
68: other quarks or gluons.
69: %In \ppbar\ collisions, gluinos could be pair produced
70: %through strong interactions.
71: %If $M_{\text{SUSY}}>10^6$ \gev, the R-hadrons live
72: %long enough (\gt10 ns) to reach the D0 calorimeters.
73: %Recent
74: %hadronization models of gluinos \cite{Kraan:2004tz} predict a
75: %spectrum with degenerate light meson-like states, and about 1/2 of
76: %R-hadrons being charged. R-hadrons can also become charged when
77: %passing through matter.
78: As studied in Ref.~\cite{Arvanitaki:2005nq}, some 30\%
79: %20--30\% (depending on $M_{\tilde g}$)
80: of R-hadrons at the Tevatron can become ``stopped gluinos" by
81: becoming charged through nuclear interactions, losing all of their
82: momentum through ionization, and coming to rest in surrounding dense
83: material. We present the first direct search for the decays of such
84: particles, with deposited hadronic energy not in-time with a \ppbar\
85: collision.
86:
87: A data sample corresponding to an integrated luminosity of
88: 410$\pm$25~\ipb\ \cite{lumi}, taken with the D0
89: detector~\cite{Abazov:2005pn} from November 2002 to August 2004, has
90: been analyzed to search for stopped gluinos.
91: %About 410$\pm$25~\ipb\ \cite{lumi} of data (a measure of integrated
92: %luminosity) taken with the D0 detector \cite{Abazov:2005pn} from
93: %November 2002 to August 2004 were analyzed in search of stopped
94: %gluinos.
95: The D0 detector has a magnetic central tracking system surrounded by
96: a uranium/liquid-argon calorimeter, contained within a muon
97: spectrometer. The tracking system, located within a 2~T solenoidal
98: magnet, is optimized for pseudorapidities $|\eta|<2.5$, where $\eta
99: = -\ln[\tan(\theta/2)]$, and $\theta$ is the polar angle with
100: respect to the proton beam direction ($z$). The calorimeter has a
101: central section (CC) covering up to $|\eta| \approx 1.1$, and two
102: end calorimeters (EC) extending coverage to $|\eta|\approx 4.2$, all
103: housed in separate cryostats~\cite{run1det}. The calorimeter is
104: divided into an electromagnetic part followed by fine and coarse
105: hadronic sections. Calorimeter cells are arranged in
106: pseudo-projective towers of size 0.1$\times$0.1 in $\eta\times\phi$,
107: where $\phi$ is the azimuthal angle. The muon system consists of a
108: layer of tracking detectors and scintillation trigger counters in
109: front of 1.8~T iron toroidal magnets (the A layer), followed by two
110: similar layers behind the toroids (the B and C layers), which
111: provide muon tracking for $|\eta|<2$. The luminosity is measured
112: using scintillator arrays located in front of the EC cryostats,
113: covering $2.7<|\eta|<4.4$. The trigger system comprises three levels
114: (L1, L2, and L3), each performing an increasingly detailed event
115: reconstruction in order to select the events of interest.
116:
117: We search for stopped gluinos decaying into a gluon and a
118: neutralino, $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$. The analysis has slightly reduced
119: sensitivity for $\tilde g$\rarrow\qqbar$\tilde{\chi}_1^0$, which may
120: be a large fraction of the decays, depending on the SUSY parameters.
121: The gluino lifetime is assumed to be long enough such that the decay
122: event is closest in time to an accelerator bunch crossing later than
123: the one that produced the gluino. For the L1 trigger to be live
124: again during the decay even if the production event was triggered
125: on, this lifetime must be at least $30~\mu$s, due to trigger
126: electronics deadtime. The efficiency for recording the gluino decay
127: is modeled as a function of the gluino lifetime, up to 100 hours.
128: When the decay occurs during a bunch crossing with
129: %very little other high-\pt\ activity,
130: no other inelastic \ppbar\ collision, the signal signature is a
131: largely empty event with a single large transverse energy (\et)
132: deposit in the calorimeter, reconstructed as a jet and large missing
133: transverse energy (\met).
134:
135: %The stopped gluino decays a majority of the time into a gluon plus a
136: %neutralino. There is also some branching fraction to \qqbar\
137: %plus a neutralino, possibly up to 50\% depending on various model
138: %parameters, but these decays will be ignored. The analysis
139: %specifically searches for mono-jet events, and limits will be set on
140: %the cross section x BR to a gluon + neutralino only.
141:
142: %Since no \ppbar\ interaction is expected to be correlated with the
143: %stopped gluino decay,
144: The trigger for each event requires that neither of the luminosity
145: scintillator arrays fired. At least two calorimeter towers of size
146: $\eta\times\phi$=0.2$\times$0.2 with \et\gt 3 \gev\ are also
147: required at L1. Jets are reconstructed with the Run II Improved
148: Legacy Cone Algorithm \cite{RunIIcone} with a cone of radius 0.5 in
149: $\eta\times\phi$ space. A reconstructed jet with \et\gt 15 \gev\ is
150: required at L3.
151: %Loose cuts are used to
152: %select a data sample to study.
153: Offline, we require exactly one jet in the event with $E$\gt 90
154: \gev, and no other jets with \et\gt 8 \gev. The calorimeter
155: requirements in the trigger are nearly 100\% efficient for events
156: that pass the 90 \gev\ offline threshold.
157: %The 90 \gev\ offline threshold is high enough
158: %such that the calorimeter part of the trigger is nearly 100\%
159: %efficient.
160:
161: To simulate stopped gluino decays, the {\sc pythia} \cite{pythia}
162: event generator is used to produce $Z$+gluon events, with the $Z$
163: boson forced to decay to neutrinos. Initial-state radiation is
164: turned off, as are multiple parton interactions.
165: %The \aeta\ of the gluon was
166: %restricted to be less than 0.1 at the generator level.
167: The spectator particles coming from the rest of the \ppbar\
168: interaction, such as the underlying event, are removed by removing
169: all far-forward particles with $|p_{z}/E|>0.95$. The location of the
170: interaction point is placed inside the calorimeter, and events are
171: further weighted such that the final decay position distribution is
172: that expected for stopped gluinos. The radial location of the gluino
173: when it decays depends on the way gluinos lose energy via ionization
174: and stop in the calorimeters. This calculation was performed
175: \cite{Arvanitaki:2005nq} for a distribution of material similar to
176: that of the D0 calorimeters and a gluino velocity distribution as
177: expected from production at the Tevatron. The $\eta$ distribution is
178: determined by the fact that gluinos would tend to be produced near
179: threshold at the Tevatron, and that only slow gluinos would stop.
180: The gluinos are thus expected to be distributed proportionally to
181: $\sin\theta$. More than 75\% of gluinos that stop have \aeta\lt 1.
182: Because the gluinos are at rest and with their spin randomly
183: oriented when they decay, the gluon is emitted in a random
184: direction. Thus a random 3D rotation is applied to the
185: %remaining
186: simulated particles.
187:
188: The energy of the gluon, which hadronizes and fragments into a jet,
189: depends on the gluino and neutralino masses: $E = (M_{\tilde
190: g}^2-M_{\tilde{\chi}_1^0}^2)/2 M_{\tilde g}$.
191: %\begin{equation}\label{eq:jetemg}
192: % E = (M_{\tilde g}^2-M_{\tilde{\chi}_1^0}^2)/2 M_{\tilde g}.
193: %\end{equation}
194: We generate four samples of stopped gluinos, containing about 1000
195: events each, using a {\sc geant}-based \cite{geant} detector
196: simulation and reconstructed using the same algorithms as data. They
197: correspond to gluino masses of 200, 300, 400, and 500 \gev, with a
198: neutralino mass of 90 \gev. These samples correspond to generated
199: gluon energies of 80, 137, 190, and 242 \gev, respectively.
200: %An event display of a simulated stopped gluino decay is shown in
201: %Fig.~\ref{fig:Lego1}(a).
202: Simulated jets are corrected for relative differences between the
203: data and simulation jet energy scales. The calorimeter electronics
204: sample the shaped ionization signal only once per bunch crossing, at
205: the assumed peak of the signal for jets originating from a \ppbar\
206: interaction, but the gluino decay can occur at any time with respect
207: to a bunch crossing. So jet energies in the simulation are also
208: corrected (downwards) according to a model of this ``out-of-time''
209: calorimeter response. The average degradation of energy is 30\%,
210: although more than half of the jets are not significantly degraded.
211:
212: %\begin{figure}\centering
213: %\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{stopped_gluino_fig4.eps}
214: %\caption{ a) A simulated stopped gluino decay event, for $M_{\tilde
215: %g}$=400 \gev. b) A typical cosmic muon shower, from hard
216: %bremsstrahlung. The height of each bar corresponds to the total \et\
217: %in that $\eta\times\phi$ calorimeter tower. (color online)}
218: %\label{fig:Lego1}
219: %\end{figure}
220:
221: The primary source of background is cosmic muons, which are able to
222: fake a gluino signal if they initiate a high-energy shower within
223: the calorimeter. Hard bremsstrahlung is responsible for the majority
224: of the showers. These showers tend to be very short, since they are
225: electromagnetic in nature and thus have small lengths compared to
226: hadronic showers.
227: %Most of the energy is deposited in a few
228: %calorimeter towers, forming a narrow cluster
229: %, see Fig.~\ref{fig:Lego1}(b).
230: However, sometimes a wide, hadronic-like, shower can be created
231: either due to deep-inelastic muon scattering, fluctuations of the
232: shower, or detector effects.
233: %Cosmic muons can
234: %also mimic other, rarer, signal-like qualities, such as a large muon
235: %``A-layer splash" caused by part of the shower escaping the
236: %calorimeter and hitting the inner (A-layer) muon chambers.
237: Cosmic muons can usually be identified by the presence of a
238: reconstructed high-energy muon. A coincidence of muon hits in the B
239: and C layers of the muon system, behind the thick iron toroid
240: magnet, is very strong evidence of a muon. The A layer muon hits are
241: often also caused by the signal, due to particles escaping the
242: calorimeters, so are difficult to use for background rejection.
243: Sometimes the muon is not detected, due to detector inefficiencies,
244: being out-of-time with the bunch crossing, or the limited
245: acceptance.
246: %Muons can also be detected, in principle, through their ionizing interactions in
247: %the calorimeter, where they are a minimum-ionizing particle (MIP).
248: %However, these MIP trails are difficult to identify in this geometry
249: %where the direction of the muon path is unknown, and also there is a
250: %large shower nearby which overlaps with the energy deposited by the
251: %MIP.
252:
253: Another source of background events is beam-halo muons, or
254: ``beam-muons." These are muons, synchronized with the \ppbar\ bunch
255: crossings and traveling nearly parallel to the beam.
256: %, as seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:lowphi_1}.
257: Often, one or more muon scintillator hits can be associated with the
258: muon, and the muon is measured to be within $\Delta t$\lt 10 ns of a
259: bunch crossing. Another feature of the beam-muons is that they are
260: nearly all in the plane of the accelerator beam.
261: %, due to the geometry of the accelerator bending magnets
262: %, i.e.\ with $\phi$ very near to an integer multiple of $\pi$.
263: %This may be due to the geometry of
264: %accelerator magnets or collimators, or gaps in the shielding at
265: %either D0 or CDF.
266: Beam-muon showers are also typically very narrow in $\phi$, causing
267: this background to be negligible once wide calorimeter showers are
268: required.
269: %Since beam-muons are traveling parallel to the beam, the
270: %$\phi$-width is small no matter how long the shower extends along
271: %the path of the muon. For the same reason, the $\eta$-width of
272: %beam-muons tends to be larger than for cosmic muons.
273:
274: %\begin{figure}\centering
275: %\includegraphics[width=3in]{lowphi_1_3Dview.eps}\hspace{0.5in}\includegraphics[width=3in]{lowphi_1_LegoPlot.eps}
276: %\caption{A typical beam-muon shower. The jet is very narrow in
277: %$\phi$, but long in $\eta$, and centered at an integer multiple of
278: %$\pi$ (in the plane of the accelerator).} \label{fig:lowphi_1}
279: %\end{figure}
280:
281: Since the trigger requires no signal in the luminosity scintillator
282: arrays, nearly all of the \ppbar\ beam produced backgrounds are
283: eliminated. An exception is diffractive events with forward rapidity
284: gaps in both the positive and negative $\eta$ regions.
285: %double diffractive events with large momentum transfer.
286: Typical \ppbar\ events have a primary vertex (PV) reconstructed from
287: tracks which originate near to each other along the beamline, where
288: the \ppbar\ interaction occurred. Dijet events in the same data
289: sample are studied to understand the \met\ spectrum and PV
290: reconstruction efficiency for beam-related backgrounds. After
291: requiring no PV to be reconstructed and large \met\ (implicit from
292: the requirement of a single high-energy jet), the \ppbar\ events are
293: negligible.
294:
295: Other sources of physics background considered are cosmic neutrons
296: and neutrinos, both of which are found to be negligible. Cosmic
297: neutrons would have to penetrate the thick iron toroid. Those
298: neutrons that did reach the calorimeter would shower preferentially
299: in the outer layers on the top of the calorimeter, which is not
300: observed.
301:
302: Finally, since the signal process is rare, we also consider
303: occasional fake signals caused by detector readout errors or
304: excessive noise. We require the jet to be in \aeta\lt 0.9, since the
305: forward regions of the calorimeter are observed to have more
306: frequent (yet still rare) problems. Also, the gluino signal tends to
307: be concentrated in the central detector region. Remaining problems
308: are isolated to a specific set of runs, detector region, or both,
309: and such events are removed.
310: %The rectangular
311: %region of the calorimeter ($-.55<\eta<-.75$, $1.3<\phi<1.5$) was too
312: %noisy and therefore all events in that region were rejected.
313: %Jet E \lt 900 \gev. This avoids certain kinds of detector problems
314: %and besides eliminates only un-physical gluinos at the Tevatron. Jet
315: %$\phi$-width and $\eta$-width were both required to be \lt 0.25 to
316: %eliminate events from certain types of detector problems.
317:
318: \begin{table} \centering
319: \caption{The selections applied, and the number of events passing in
320: data and for a simulated signal with $M_{\tilde g}$=400 \gev\ and
321: $M_{\tilde{\chi}_1^0}$=90 \gev.}
322: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
323: \hline
324: \hline
325: Selection & Data Events & Signal Events \\
326: \hline
327: Total & 7199133 & 2000 \\
328: Exactly one jet (\et\gt 8 GeV) & 3691036 & 1678 \\
329: Jet \aeta\lt 0.9 & 2742353 & 1505 \\
330: Jet E\gt 90 GeV & 202568 & 805 \\
331: No PV & 198380 & 803 \\
332: Data quality & 189781 & 772 \\
333: Jet $\eta$ and $\phi$ widths \gt 0.08 & 5994 & 410 \\
334: Jet n90 \gt 10 & 1402 & 383 \\
335: No muons & 109 & 357 \\
336: \hline
337: \hline
338: \end{tabular}
339: \label{table:selections}
340: \end{table}
341:
342: %Given the background characteristics,
343: The following criteria are used to select events containing
344: ``wide-showers'': jet $\eta$-width and $\phi$-width \gt 0.08 and jet
345: $n_{90}$ $\ge$10, where $n_{90}$ is the smallest number of
346: calorimeter towers in the jet that make up 90\% of the jet
347: transverse energy. The reverse criteria define a ``narrow-shower."
348: Criteria are also defined which select events containing ``no-muon''
349: or a ``cosmic-muon." An event contains no-muon if there are no B-C
350: layer muon segments in the event, and no A layer segments with
351: $\Delta\phi$\gt 1.5 radians from the jet direction. Cosmic-muon
352: events have at least one B-C layer muon segment with $|\Delta t|$\gt
353: 10 ns from the bunch crossing time. A candidate stopped gluino decay
354: event contains both a wide-shower and no-muon.
355: %Fig.~\ref{fig:nogoodmu_1} shows a display of a candidate event.
356:
357: %\begin{figure}\centering
358: %\includegraphics[width=3in]{nogoodmu_1_3Dview.eps}
359: %\includegraphics[width=3in]{nogoodmu_1_LegoPlot.eps}
360: %\caption{A candidate signal event in data, containing a wide-shower
361: %with no good muon.} \label{fig:nogoodmu_1}
362: %\end{figure}
363:
364: To estimate the number of such wide-shower no-muon events expected
365: from cosmic muon background, we use the assumption that the
366: probability not to reconstruct a cosmic muon in the muon system is
367: independent of whether the muon's shower in the calorimeter is
368: narrow or wide. A subset of the narrow-shower data sample is defined
369: which is nearly devoid of beam-muons by requiring a shower out of
370: the accelerator plane. This cosmic-muon narrow-shower data subset
371: has a similar $\eta$ distribution to the wide-shower data, and the
372: $\eta$ and $\phi$ shower width distributions are not altered
373: significantly when requiring a muon. The probability to not
374: reconstruct the muon in this narrow-shower data sample is measured
375: to be 0.11$\pm$0.01, independent of shower energy. This probability
376: is applied to the wide-shower cosmic-muon data sample to predict the
377: jet energy spectrum of wide-shower no-muon background events, as
378: shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:back_log}. The data agree with the estimated
379: background from cosmic muons. There is no significant excess in any
380: jet energy range, and the data has the predicted shape in $\eta$ and
381: $\phi$.
382:
383: \begin{figure}\centering
384: %\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{data_vs_back-new.eps}
385: \includegraphics[width=1.75in]{jetphi_final.eps}\includegraphics[width=1.75in]{jeteta_final.eps}
386: \includegraphics[width=3.2in,height=1.8in]{data_vs_back-new-log.eps}
387: \caption{A comparison of the wide-shower no-muon data (points) to
388: the expected background from cosmic muons (solid histogram) and a
389: simulated signal
390: %for $M_{\tilde g}$=400 \gev\ and
391: %$M_{\tilde{\chi}_1^0}$=90 \gev\ at the excluded production cross
392: %section limit of 0.71 pb
393: (dashed histogram).} \label{fig:back_log}
394: \end{figure}
395:
396: We search for a signal in jet energy ranges with widths chosen from
397: the jet energy resolutions of the simulated signal samples. The
398: ranges are from $M-\sigma/2$ to $M+2\sigma$, where $M$ is the mean
399: jet energy of the sample and $\sigma$ is the sample's jet energy
400: RMS.
401: %after all selections and corrections
402: %Approximately 80\% of the
403: %simulated signal events are within this window cut, depending weakly
404: %on the signal mass.
405: An asymmetric window is chosen since the background is steeply
406: falling with increasing jet energy.
407:
408: \begin{figure}\centering
409: \includegraphics[width=1.75in]{gluino_eff_life.eps}\includegraphics[width=1.75in]{store_profile.eps}
410: \caption{ Left: The trigger efficiency vs.~gluino lifetime. Right:
411: The instantaneous luminosity profile used to model the trigger
412: efficiency. Dashed lines indicate a 50\% chance of the store
413: occurring. } \label{fig:stores}
414: \end{figure}
415:
416: To first order, the detection efficiency for the decays of the
417: stopped gluino signal events can be estimated from the simulation,
418: but some effects are not modeled. There is a loss of efficiency at
419: the trigger level from the requirement of neither luminosity
420: scintillator array firing. If a minimum bias collision happens to
421: occur during the bunch crossing when the gluino decays, a luminosity
422: scintillator array may fire. The fraction of the time this occurs
423: has been measured using cosmic-muon events triggered on a jet-only
424: trigger with high threshold. The efficiency of the luminosity
425: scintillator array trigger requirement, averaged over the data set,
426: is 75\%. The probability to have minimum bias interactions during a
427: given crossing is Poisson distributed, with a mean
428: %proportional to $e^{-\lambda}$, where
429: %$\lambda$ is the average number of interactions per crossing, which is
430: proportional to the instantaneous luminosity, approximately 20e30
431: $\text{cm}^{-1}\text{s}^{-1}$ on average for this data set.
432: %For this data set,
433: %$\lambda\simeq0.3$ on average.
434: A detailed model of the trigger efficiency is made as a function of
435: the gluino lifetime, for lifetimes up to 100 hours, using the
436: typical Tevatron store luminosity profile as input (see
437: Fig.~\ref{fig:stores}). Stores typically last $\sim$24 hours with a
438: 50\% chance of another store following, 6 hours later. The current
439: luminosity at the time of the gluino decay, and thus the chance to
440: have an overlapping interaction, is accounted for. Another source of
441: inefficiency is that the trigger is not live all the time, but only
442: during the ``live super-bunches," which make up 68\% of the total
443: run time.
444:
445: The uncertainties from all sources which affect the signal
446: acceptance are added in quadrature, totaling (20--25)\%. They
447: include the modeling of the out-of-time jet response (12\%), the
448: data/simulation jet energy scale (9\%), the $\eta$ and radial
449: distributions of stopped gluinos [(7--9)\%], other geometrical or
450: kinematic acceptances (5\%), and trigger efficiency [(5--15)\%].
451:
452: \begin{table} \centering
453: \caption{The data, background, signal efficiency (for stopped
454: gluinos where $\tilde g$\rarrow$g\tilde{\chi}_1^0$), and expected
455: and observed cross section upper limits (at the 95\% C.L.) for each
456: jet energy range, for a small gluino lifetime, less than 3 hours.}
457: \begin{tabular}{cccccc}
458: \hline
459: \hline
460: Energy (\gev) & Data & Bgnd. & Eff.(\%) & Exp. (pb) & Obs. (pb)\\
461: \hline
462: ~92.5--104.6 & 30 & 37$\pm$3.7 & 1.7$\pm$0.34 & 2.61 & 1.81 \\
463: 112.4--156.6 & 39 & 40$\pm$4.0 & 4.9$\pm$0.98 & 0.94 & 0.89 \\
464: 141.3--213.0 & 34 & 31$\pm$3.1 & 6.8$\pm$1.36 & 0.56 & 0.71 \\
465: 168.7--270.6 & 32 & 26$\pm$2.6 & 7.2$\pm$1.44 & 0.48 & 0.75 \\
466: \hline
467: \hline
468: \end{tabular}
469: \label{table:cslimits}
470: \end{table}
471:
472: Given an observed number of candidate events, an expected number of
473: background events, and a signal efficiency in a certain jet energy
474: range, we can exclude at the 95\% C.L. a calculated rate of signal
475: events giving jets of that energy, taking systematic uncertainties
476: into account using a Bayesian approach (see Table
477: \ref{table:cslimits}). This is a fairly model-independent result,
478: limiting the rate of any out-of-time mono-jet signal of a given
479: energy.
480: %The integrated luminosity was 410$\pm$25~\ipb.
481: %From there, one can derive limits in the plane of $M_{\tilde g} -
482: %M_{\tilde{\chi}_1^0}$ for a specific stopped gluino model.
483: %These results are also shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:cslimits}.
484:
485: %\begin{figure}\centering
486: %\includegraphics[width=3in]{limits.eps}
487: %\caption{The 95\% C.L. upper limits expected (black, open circles)
488: %and observed (blue, filled circles) on the cross section of stopped
489: %particles decaying into a jet within various energy ranges.}
490: %\label{fig:cslimits}
491: %\end{figure}
492:
493: \begin{figure}\centering
494: \includegraphics[width=3.2in,height=1.8in]{limitsall.eps}
495: \includegraphics[width=3.2in,height=1.8in]{limitslife.eps}
496: \caption{ Top: The expected and observed upper limits on the cross
497: section of stopped gluinos, assuming a 100\% BR of $\tilde g$\rarrow
498: g$\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ and a small gluino lifetime (\lt 3 hours), for
499: three choices of the $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass: 50, 90 and 200 \gev,
500: from left to right. Bottom: The upper limits observed on the cross
501: section of stopped gluinos, for various assumptions of the gluino
502: lifetime, for a $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass of 50 \gev. Also shown are
503: the theoretical stopped gluino cross sections (dashed lines, shaded
504: area), from Ref.~\cite{Arvanitaki:2005nq}, for
505: %conversion cross sections of 0.3, 3, and 30 mb (left to right).
506: the range of assumed conversion cross sections. }
507: \label{fig:limitsall}
508: \end{figure}
509:
510: From the relation between the gluino and $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ masses
511: and the observed jet energy,
512: %Eq.~\ref{eq:jetemg},
513: %one can solve for the gluino mass and
514: results can be translated from the generated set of signal samples
515: to any other set of ($M_{\tilde g}$,$M_{\tilde{\chi}_1^0}$) which
516: would give the same jet energy. We can therefore place upper limits
517: on the stopped gluino cross section vs.~the gluino mass, for an
518: assumed $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass, assuming a 100\% branching fraction
519: for $\tilde g$\rarrow g$\tilde{\chi}_1^0$. These can be compared
520: with the predicted cross sections for stopped gluinos (which include
521: its production rate and its probability to stop) taken from
522: Ref.~\cite{Arvanitaki:2005nq}. Three curves are drawn to represent
523: the large theory uncertainty, resulting from the variation of the
524: neutral to charged R-hadron conversion cross section used: 0.3, 3,
525: and 30 mb. Fig.~\ref{fig:limitsall} (top) shows these upper limits
526: for $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ masses of 50, 90, and 200 \gev, for a small
527: gluino lifetime, less than 3 hours. If the gluino lifetime is
528: greater than 3 hours, the average efficiency of the trigger degrades
529: because signal events are not recorded between accelerator stores,
530: and the limits become weaker, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:limitsall}
531: (bottom).
532:
533: This is the first search for exotic, out-of-time hadronic energy
534: deposits at a high-energy collider. The results from 410~\ipb\ of
535: Tevatron data are able to exclude a cross section of $\sim$1 pb for
536: gluinos stopping in the D0 calorimeter and later decaying into a
537: gluon and neutralino. For a $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass of 50 GeV, we
538: are able to exclude $M_{\tilde g}$\lt 270 \gev, assuming a 100\%
539: branching fraction for $\tilde g$\rarrow g$\tilde{\chi}_1^0$, a
540: gluino lifetime less than 3 hours, and a neutral to charged R-hadron
541: conversion cross section of 3 mb.
542:
543: Thanks to Jay Wacker
544: %and L. Schwartz
545: for very helpful inputs and discussions.
546: \input acknowledgement_paragraph_r2.tex % input acknowledgement
547:
548: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
549:
550: \input list_of_visitor_addresses_r2.tex % input visitors address
551:
552: %\cite{Arkani-Hamed:2004yi}
553: \bibitem{Arkani-Hamed:2004yi}
554: N.~Arkani-Hamed, S.~Dimopoulos, G.~F.~Giudice, and A.~Romanino,
555: %``Aspects of split supersymmetry,''
556: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 709}, 3 (2005).
557: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0409232;%%
558:
559: %\cite{Pape:2006ar}
560: \bibitem{Pape:2006ar}
561: L.~Pape and D.~Treille,
562: %``Supersymmetry facing experiment: Much ado (already) about nothing (yet),''
563: Rept.\ Prog.\ Phys.\ {\bf 69}, 2843 (2006).
564: %%CITATION = RPPHA,69,2843;%%
565:
566: \bibitem{rhadron}
567: G. R. Farrar and P. Fayet,
568: %"Phenomenology Of The Production, Decay,
569: %And Detection Of New Hadronic States Associated With Supersymmetry,"
570: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 76}, 575 (1978).
571:
572: %\cite{Kraan:2004tz}
573: %\bibitem{Kraan:2004tz}
574: % A.~C.~Kraan,
575: % %``Interactions of heavy stable hadronizing particles,''
576: % Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 37}, 91 (2004)
577: % [arXiv:hep-ex/0404001].
578: % %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0404001;%%
579:
580: %\cite{Arvanitaki:2005nq}
581: \bibitem{Arvanitaki:2005nq}
582: A.~Arvanitaki, S.~Dimopoulos, A.~Pierce, S.~Rajendran and J.~Wacker,
583: %``Stopping gluinos,''
584: arXiv:hep-ph/0506242.
585: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0506242;%%
586:
587: \bibitem{lumi}
588: T.~Andeen {\sl et. al.}, FERMILAB-TM-2365-E (2006).
589:
590: %\cite{Abazov:2005pn}
591: \bibitem{Abazov:2005pn}
592: V.~M.~Abazov {\it et al.} [D0 Collaboration], Nucl.\ Instrum.\
593: Methods A~{\bf 565}, 463 (2006).
594: %\\{}FERMILAB-PUB-05-341-E
595: %\href{http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?eprint=physics\%2F0507191}{SPIRES entry}
596:
597: \bibitem{run1det}
598: D\O\ Collaboration, S.~Abachi {\sl et al.}, Nucl. Instrum. Methods
599: A~{\bf 338}, 185 (1994).
600:
601: \bibitem{RunIIcone}
602: G.~C.~Blazey {\sl et al.}, in
603: {\sl Proceedings of the Workshop: QCD and Weak Boson Physics in Run II,}
604: edited by U.~Baur, R.~K.~Ellis, and D.~Zeppenfeld,
605: Fermilab-Pub-00/297 (2000), Sec. 3.5.
606:
607: \bibitem{pythia}
608: T.~Sj{\"o}strand {\sl et al.}, Comp.\ Phys.\ Comm.\ {\bf 135}, 238
609: (2001).
610: %T.~Sjostrand, P.~Eden, C.~Friberg, L.~Lonnblad, G.~Miu, S.~Mrenna and E.~Norrbin,
611: %``High-energy-physics event generation with PYTHIA 6.1,''
612: %Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\ {\bf 135}, 238 (2001).
613: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0010017].
614: %Computer Phys. Commun. 135 (2001) 238. (LU TP 00-30,hep-ph/0010017).
615:
616: \bibitem{geant}
617: R. Brun and F. Carminati, CERN Program Library Long Writeup W5013,
618: 1993 (unpublished).
619:
620: \end{thebibliography}
621:
622: \end{document}
623: