1: %\documentclass[prl,twocolumn,showpacs,superscriptaddress,floatfix]{revtex4}
2: \documentclass[aps,prl,twocolumn,superscriptaddress,showpacs]{revtex4}
3: %\documentclass[preprint,showpacs,superscriptaddress,floatfix]{revtex4}
4: %\documentclass[prl,showpacs,superscriptaddress,floatfix]{revtex4}
5: %
6: % First start from Run 1 PRL Sept. 19, 2005 HJF
7: %
8: \usepackage{epsfig}
9: \usepackage{graphicx}
10: \usepackage{dcolumn}
11: \usepackage{amsmath}
12: \usepackage{xspace}
13: % uncomment this for doublespace
14: %\usepackage{doublespace}
15: %
16: \newcommand{\linespace}[1]{\protect\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{#1}\footnotesize\normalsize}
17: %
18: \newcommand{\pbarp}{{\bar p}p}
19: \newcommand{\ppbar}{p{\bar p}}
20: \newcommand{\invpb}{\rm pb^{-1}} % Should be roman in PRL
21: \newcommand{\bfinvpb}{\bf pb^{-1}} % Should be roman in PRL
22: \newcommand{\roots}{{\sqrt s}}
23: \newcommand{\pml} {\ \,\pm}
24: \newcommand{\Et}{\rm E_T}
25: \newcommand{\Pt}{\rm p_T}
26: \newcommand{\Ht}{H_T}
27: \newcommand{\eeggmet}{ee\gamma\gamma\met}
28: \newcommand{\lgal}{\ell\gamma}
29: %\newcommand{\lgX}{\ell\gamma+X}
30: \newcommand{\lgX}{\ell\gamma\plus X}
31: \newcommand{\ggX}{\gamma\gamma+X}
32: \newcommand{ \intlum }{\int {\mathcal L} dt}
33: \newcommand{\gt}{>}
34: \newcommand{\lt}{<}
35: \newcommand{\intL}{\int {\mathit L}dt}
36: \newcommand{\met}{{\rm\not\!\!E}_{T}}
37: \newcommand{\metvec}{{\not\!\! \vec{E}_T}}
38: \newcommand{\lepvec}{{\vec{E}_T^\ell}}
39: \newcommand{\phovec}{{\vec{E}_T^\gamma}}
40: \newcommand{\boxiso}{E^{iso}_{3x3}}
41: \newcommand{\coriso}{{\rm E^{iso}_{cone}}}
42: \newcommand{\lplm}{\ell^+\ell^-}
43: \newcommand{\lgmet}{\ell\gamma\met}
44: \newcommand{\egmet}{e\gamma\met}
45: \newcommand{\eg}{e\gamma}
46: \newcommand{\mug}{\mu\gamma}
47: \newcommand{\mugmet}{\mu\gamma\met}
48: \newcommand{\llg}{\ell\ell\gamma}
49: \newcommand{\llgg}{\ell\ell\gamma\gamma}
50: \newcommand{\eeg}{ee\gamma}
51: \newcommand{\mumug}{\mu\mu\gamma}
52: \newcommand{\Zee}{Z^0 \rightarrow e^+e^-}
53: \newcommand{\Zeg}{Z^0 \rightarrow e\gamma}
54: \newcommand{\Wg}{W \gamma}
55: \newcommand{\Zg}{Z^0 \gamma}
56: \newcommand{\Wgg}{W \gamma\gamma}
57: \newcommand{\Zgg}{Z^0 \gamma\gamma}
58: \newcommand{\Z}{Z^0}
59: \newcommand{\Zgstar}{Z^0\kern -0.25em/\kern -0.15em\gamma^*}
60: \newcommand{\epem}{e^+e^-}
61: \newcommand{\lumi}{305}
62: \newcommand{\dlumi}{18}
63: \newcommand{\goes}{\kern -0.18em\rightarrow\kern -0.18em}
64: \newcommand{\plus}{\kern -0.18em +\kern -0.18em}
65: \newcommand{\degs}{\mbox{$^{\circ}$}}
66: %\newcommand{\}{}
67: %
68: % Some internal numbers
69: \newcommand{\ntotinclusive}{574}
70: \newcommand{\nelinclusive}{508}
71: \newcommand{\nmuinclusive}{66}
72: \newcommand{\nelbtb}{397}
73: \newcommand{\ntotlgammamet}{42}
74: \newcommand{\nelgammamet}{25}
75: \newcommand{\nmugammamet}{17}
76: \newcommand{\ntotllg}{31}
77: \newcommand{\nelllg}{19}
78: \newcommand{\nmullg}{12}
79: %\def\lg{\ell\gamma}
80: %\newcommand{
81: %YOUAREHERE
82: %
83: % Define GeV so that the space between the "e" and "V" is correct.
84: % The xspace macro must be defined
85: %
86: \newcommand{\MeV}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{\ Me\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace}
87: \newcommand{\MeVc}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{\ Me\kern -0.1em V\kern -0.1em
88: /\mathit{c}}}\xspace}
89: \newcommand{\MeVcsq}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{\ Me\kern -0.1em V\kern -0.1em
90: /\mathit{c}^2}}\xspace}
91: \newcommand{\GeV}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ge\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace}
92: \newcommand{\GeVc}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V\kern -0.1em
93: /\mathit{c}}}\xspace}
94: \newcommand{\GeVcsq}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{\ Ge\kern -0.1em V\kern -0.1em
95: /\mathit{c}^2}}\xspace}
96: \newcommand{\TeV}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Te\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace}
97: \newcommand{\bfTeV}{\ensuremath{\bf{Te\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace}
98: \newcommand{\nsGeV}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ge\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace}
99: \newcommand{\nsGeVc}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ge\kern -0.1em V\kern -0.1em
100: /\mathit{c}}}\xspace}
101: \newcommand{\Etgamma}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{E_T^{\gamma}}}}
102: \newcommand{\Etlepton}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{E_T^{\ell}}}}
103: \newcommand{\LPX}{Lepton + Photon + X~}
104: \newcommand{\lpX}{lepton + photon + X~}
105:
106: %\textheight 9.2in
107: %\topmargin -0.1in
108:
109: \begin{document}
110: \title{Search for New Physics in Lepton + Photon + X
111: Events with $\bf\lumi$ $\bfinvpb$ of $\bf\ppbar$ Collisions at $\bf\roots$= 1.96 $\bfTeV$}
112: \input{January_2006_Authors_added}
113: \preprint{FERMILAB-PUB-05/yyy-E}
114: %\preprint{EFI-05-zzz}
115:
116:
117: %\input{cdf_auth.tex}
118: %\input{run1_revtex4_auth.tex}
119: \date{\today}
120:
121: \begin{abstract}
122: We present results of a search for anomalous production of events
123: containing a charged lepton ($\ell$, either $e$ or $\mu$) and a photon
124: ($\gamma$), both with high transverse momentum, accompanied by
125: additional signatures, X, including missing transverse energy ($\met$)
126: and additional leptons and photons. We use the same selection criteria
127: as in a previous CDF search, but with a substantially larger data set,
128: $\lumi$ $\invpb$, a $\ppbar$ collision energy of 1.96 $\TeV$, and the
129: CDF II detector. We find 42 $\lgmet$ events versus an expectation of
130: 37.3 $\pm$ 5.4 events. We observe $\ntotllg$ $\llg + X$ events versus
131: an expectation of 23.0 $\pm$ 2.7 events. We find no events similar to
132: the Run I $\eeggmet$ event.
133: \end{abstract}
134: %\begin{abstract}
135: %We present results of a search for anomalous production of events
136: %containing a charged lepton ($\ell$, either $e$ or $\mu$) and a photon
137: %($\gamma$), both with high transverse momentum, accompanied by
138: %additional signatures, X, including missing transverse energy ($\met$)
139: %and additional leptons and photons. We use the same kinematic
140: %selection criteria as in a previous CDF search, but with a
141: %substantially larger data set, $\lumi$ $\invpb$, a $\ppbar$ collision
142: %energy of 1.96 $\TeV$, and the upgraded CDF II detector. We find 42
143: %$\lgmet$ events versus a standard model expectation of 37.3 $\pm$ 5.4
144: %events. The level of excess observed in Run I, 16 events with
145: %an expectation of 7.6 $\pm$ 0.7 events (corresponding to a 2.7$\sigma$
146: %effect), is not supported by the new data. In the signature of $\llg + X$
147: %we observe $\ntotllg$ events versus an expectation of 23.0 $\pm$ 2.7
148: %events. In this sample we find no events with an extra photon or
149: %$\met$ and so find no events like the one $\eeggmet$ event observed in
150: %Run I.
151: %\end{abstract}
152:
153: \pacs{13.85.Rm, 12.60.Jv, 13.85.Qk, 14.80.Ly}
154: % PACS, the Physics and Astronomy Classification Scheme.
155:
156: \maketitle
157:
158: In 1995 the CDF experiment, studying $\ppbar$ collisions in 86
159: $\invpb$ of data at a center-of-mass energy of 1.8 $\TeV$ at the
160: Fermilab Tevatron, observed~\cite{Toback_all}
161: an event consistent with the production of two energetic photons, two
162: energetic electrons, and large missing transverse energy
163: $\met$~\cite{EtPt}. This signature is predicted to be very rare in the
164: standard model (SM) of particle physics~\cite{SM}, with the dominant
165: contribution being from the production of four gauge bosons: two W
166: bosons and two photons. The event raised theoretical interest,
167: however, as the $\llgg$ signature is expected in some models of
168: physics ``beyond the standard model'' such as gauge-mediated models of
169: supersymmetry~\cite{susy} or the production of a pair of excited
170: electrons~\cite{excited_electron}. The detection of this event
171: led to the development of ``signature-based'' inclusive searches to
172: cast a wider net for new phenomena: in this case one search for two photons + X ($\ggX$)
173: %~\cite{Toback_PRD,Toback_PRL,Toback_thesis}, and a second for one
174: ~\cite{Toback_all}, and a second for one
175: lepton + one photon + X ($\lgX$)~\cite{Jeff_PRD,Jeff_PRL,Jeff_thesis},
176: where X can be $e$, $\mu$, $\gamma$, or
177: $\met$, plus any number of jets.
178: %If pairs of new particles were being
179: %created, these inclusive signatures could be sensitive to possible other
180: %decay modes, or the creation and decay of related new particles.
181:
182: Neither Run I search revealed convincing evidence for new
183: physics. However, in the $\lgX$ search, the results were
184: consistent with SM expectations, with ``the
185: possible exception of photon-lepton events with large $\met$, for
186: which the observed total was 16 events and the SM expectation was 7.6
187: $\pm$ 0.7 events, corresponding in likelihood to a 2.7 sigma
188: effect.''~\cite{Jeff_PRL}. The Run I paper concluded: ``However, an
189: excess of events with 0.7\% likelihood (equivalent to 2.7 standard
190: deviations for a Gaussian distribution) in one subsample among the
191: five studied is an interesting result, but it is not a compelling
192: observation of new physics. We look forward to more data in the
193: upcoming run of the Fermilab Tevatron.''~\cite{Jeff_PRL}. In this
194: Letter we report the results of repeating the $\lgX$ search with the
195: same kinematic selection criteria in a substantially larger data set,
196: $\lumi\pm\dlumi$ $\invpb$, a higher $\ppbar$ collision energy, 1.96 $\TeV$, and
197: the CDF II detector~\cite{CDFII}.
198:
199: The CDF II detector is a cylindrically symmetric spectrometer designed
200: to study $\ppbar$ collisions at the Fermilab Tevatron based on the
201: same solenoidal magnet and central calorimeters as the CDF I
202: detector~\cite{CDFI} from which it was upgraded. Because the analysis
203: described here is intended to repeat the Run I search as closely as
204: possible, we note especially the differences from the CDF I detector
205: relevant to the detection of leptons, photons, and $\met$. The
206: tracking systems used to measure the momenta of charged particles have
207: been replaced with a central outer tracker (COT) with smaller drift
208: cells~\cite{COT}, and an enhanced system of silicon strip
209: detectors~\cite{SVX}. The calorimeters in the regions~\cite{CDF_coo}
210: with pseudorapidity $|\eta| \gt 1$ have been replaced with a more
211: compact scintillator-based design, retaining the projective
212: geometry~\cite{cal_upgrade}. %The central CMU, CMP, and
213: %CMX~\cite{muon_systems} muon systems are unchanged in design, but
214: The coverage in $\varphi$ of the CMP and CMX muon
215: systems~\cite{muon_systems} has been extended; the CMU system is
216: unchanged~\cite{CDFII}.
217: %The data presented here were taken
218: %between March 2002 and August 2004.
219: %and represent $\lumi$ $\invpb$ of integrated luminosity.
220:
221: A 3-level trigger~\cite{CDFII} system selects events
222: with a high transverse momentum ($\Pt$)~\cite{EtPt} lepton ($\Pt >
223: 18~\GeV$) or
224: photon ($\Et > 25~\GeV$) in the central region, $|\eta|
225: \lesssim 1.0$. The trigger system selects photon and electron
226: candidates from clusters of energy in the central electromagnetic
227: calorimeter. Electrons are distinguished from photons by
228: requiring a COT track pointing at the cluster. The
229: muon trigger requires a COT track that extrapolates to a %reconstructed
230: track segment (``stub'') in the muon chambers.
231:
232: %We use the same kinematic event selection as in the Run I analysis:
233: Inclusive $\lgal$ events are selected by requiring a central $\gamma$
234: candidate with $\Etgamma>25$ $\GeV$ and a central $e$
235: or $\mu$ with $\Etlepton>25$ $\GeV$ originating
236: less than 60 cm along the beam-line from the detector center and
237: passing the ``tight'' criteria listed below.
238:
239: The identification of leptons and photons is essentially the same as
240: in the Run I search~\cite{Jeff_PRD}.
241: % with only minor technical
242: %differences, mostly due to changes in the construction of the tracking
243: %system and end-plug calorimeters.
244: A muon candidate passing the ``tight'' cuts must have: a) a
245: well-measured track in the COT; b) energy deposited in the calorimeter
246: consistent with expectations; c) a muon ``stub'' in both the CMU and
247: CMP, or in the CMX, consistent with the extrapolated COT track; and d)
248: COT timing consistent with a track from a $\ppbar$ collision. An
249: electron candidate passing the ``tight'' selection must have: a) a
250: high-quality track with $\Pt>0.5~\Et$, unless $\Et > 100$ $\GeV$, in
251: which case the $\Pt$ threshold is set to 25 $\GeV$; b) a good
252: transverse shower profile that matches the extrapolated track
253: position; c) a lateral sharing of energy in the two calorimeter towers
254: containing the electron shower consistent with that expected; and d)
255: minimal leakage into the hadron calorimeter~\cite{hadoem}.
256:
257: Photon candidates are required to have no track with $\Pt>1$ $\GeV$,
258: and at most one track with $\Pt<1$ $\GeV$, pointing at the calorimeter
259: cluster; good profiles in both transverse dimensions at shower
260: maximum; and minimal leakage into the hadron
261: calorimeter~\cite{hadoem}.
262:
263: To reduce background from photons or leptons from the decays of
264: hadrons produced in jets, both the photon and the lepton in each event
265: are required to be ``isolated''. The $\Et$ deposited in the
266: calorimeter towers in a cone in $\eta-\varphi$ space~\cite{CDF_coo} of
267: radius $R=0.4$ around the photon or lepton position is summed, and the
268: $\Et$ due to the photon or lepton is subtracted. The remaining $\Et$
269: is required to be less than
270: $2.0~\GeV+0.02\times(\Et-20~\GeV)$ for a photon, or less than 10\% of
271: the $\Et$ for electrons or $\Pt$ for muons. In addition, for photons
272: the sum of the $\Pt$ of all tracks in the cone must be less than
273: $2.0~\GeV+0.005\times\Et$.
274:
275: Missing transverse energy $\met$ is calculated from the calorimeter
276: tower energies in the region $|\eta| < 3.6$. Corrections are then made
277: to the $\met$ for non-uniform calorimeter response~\cite{jet_corr} for
278: jets with uncorrected $\Et > 15$ $\GeV$ and $\eta < 2.0$, and for
279: muons with $\Pt > 20$ $\GeV$.
280:
281: A total of $\ntotinclusive$ events, $\nelinclusive$ inclusive $\eg$
282: and $\nmuinclusive$ inclusive $\mug$ candidates, pass the $\lgal$
283: selection criteria. Of the $\nelinclusive$ inclusive $\eg$ events,
284: $\nelbtb$ have the electron and photon within 30$\degs$ of
285: back-to-back in $\varphi$, $\met< 25$ $\GeV$, and no additional
286: leptons or photons. These are dominated by $\Zee$ decays in which one
287: of the electrons radiates a high-$\Et$ photon while traversing the
288: material inside the COT active volume, leading to the observation of
289: an electron and a photon approximately back-to-back in $\varphi$, with
290: an $\eg$ invariant mass close to the $Z^0$ mass.
291:
292:
293: \begin{figure}[!tb]
294: \begin{center}
295: \hspace*{-0.1in}
296: \includegraphics*[angle =90,width=0.50\textwidth]{figure1.eps}
297: \end{center}
298: \caption{ The distributions for events in the $\lgmet$ sample (points)
299: in a) the $\Et$ of the photon; b) the $\Et$ of the lepton; c) the
300: missing transverse energy, $\met$; and d) the transverse mass of the
301: $\lgmet$ system. The histograms
302: show the expected SM
303: contributions, including estimated backgrounds from misidentified
304: photons and leptons.}
305: \label{figure1}
306: \end{figure}
307:
308: We use $W^\pm$ and $Z^0$ production as control samples to ensure that
309: the efficiencies for high-$\Pt$ electrons and muons, as well as for
310: $\met$, are well understood. The photon control sample is constructed
311: from events in which one of the electrons radiates a high-$\Et$
312: $\gamma$ such that the $\eg$ invariant mass
313: is within 10 $\GeV$ of the $Z^0$ mass.
314:
315: The first search we perform is in the $\lgmet+X$ subsample, defined by
316: requiring that an event contain $\met> 25~\GeV$ in addition to the
317: $\gamma$ and ``tight'' lepton. Of the $\ntotinclusive$ $\lgal$ events,
318: $\nelgammamet$ $e\gamma\met$ events and $\nmugammamet$ $\mu\gamma\met$
319: events pass the $\met$ requirement. Figure~\ref{figure1} shows the
320: observed distributions
321: %summed over the $\egmet$ and $\mugmet$ events
322: in a) the $\Et$ of the photon; b) the $\Et$ of the lepton; c) $\met$;
323: and d) the transverse mass of the
324: $\lgmet$ system, where
325: $\rm{M_T} = [{(\rm E_T^\ell+E_T^\gamma + \met)^2}$ -
326: $(\lepvec + \phovec + \metvec)^2]^{1/2}$.
327:
328: A second search, for the $\llg+X$ signature, is constructed by
329: requiring another $e$ or $\mu$ in addition to the ``tight'' lepton
330: and the $\gamma$. The additional muons are required to have $\Pt >
331: 20~\GeV$ and to satisfy the same
332: criteria as for ``tight'' muons but with fewer
333: hits required on the track, or, alternatively,
334: a more stringent cut on track quality
335: but no requirement that there be a matching ``stub'' in the muon
336: systems. Additional central electrons are required to have $\Et >
337: 20~\GeV$ and to satisfy the tight central electron criteria
338: but with a track requirement of only $\Pt>10$ $\GeV$ (rather than
339: 0.5$\times\Et$), and no requirement on a shower maximum measurement or
340: lateral energy sharing between calorimeter towers. Electrons in the
341: end-plug calorimeters ($1.2 < |\eta| < 2.0$) are required to have
342: $\Et> 15~\GeV$, minimal leakage into the hadron calorimeter, a
343: ``track'' containing at least 3 hits in the silicon tracking system,
344: and a shower transverse shape consistent with that expected, with a
345: centroid close to the extrapolated position of the
346: track~\cite{wenu_asymmetry_paper}.
347:
348: The $\llg$ search criteria select $\ntotllg$ events ($\nelllg$ $\eeg$
349: and $\nmullg$ $\mumug$) of the $\ntotinclusive$ $\lgal$ events. No
350: $e\mu\gamma$ events are observed. Figure~\ref{figure2} shows the
351: observed distributions in a) the $\Et$ of the photon; b) the $\Et$ of
352: the leptons; c) the 2-body mass of the dilepton system; and d) the
353: 3-body mass $m_{\llg}$.
354:
355: \begin{figure}[b]
356: \vspace*{-0.2in}
357: \begin{center}
358: \hspace*{-0.1in}
359: \includegraphics*[angle=90,width=0.50\textwidth]{figure2.eps}
360: \end{center}
361: \caption{ The distributions for events in the $\llg$ sample (points)
362: in a) the $\Et$ of the photon; b) the $\Et$ of the leptons (two
363: entries per event); c) the 2-body mass of the dilepton system; and d)
364: the 3-body mass $m_{\llg}$. The histograms show the expected SM
365: contributions.}
366: \label{figure2}
367: \end{figure}
368:
369: We do not expect SM events with large $\met$ in the $\llg$ sample;
370: the Run I $\eeggmet$ event was of special
371: interest in the context of supersymmetry~\cite{susy} due to the large
372: value of $\met$ (55 $\pm$ 7 $\GeV$). Figure~\ref{figure3} shows the
373: distributions in $\met$ for the $\mumug$ and $\eeg$ subsamples of the
374: $\llg$ sample. No events are observed with $\met> 25$ $\GeV$.
375:
376: \begin{figure}[!b]
377: \vspace*{-0.2in}
378: \begin{center}
379: %\hspace*{-0.1in}
380: \includegraphics*[width=0.18\textwidth, angle=90,clip=]{figure3.eps}
381: \end{center}
382: \caption{The distributions in missing transverse energy $\met$
383: observed in the inclusive search for a) $\mumug$ events and
384: b) $\eeg$ events. The histograms show the expected SM
385: contributions.}
386: \label{figure3}
387: \end{figure}
388:
389: The dominant SM source of $\lgal$ events is electroweak
390: $W$ and $\Zgstar$ production along with a $\gamma$ radiated from one
391: of the charged particles involved in the process~\cite{CDF_WZgamma}.
392: %in which a $W$ or $\Zgstar$ boson decays
393: %leptonically ($\ell \nu$ or $\ell\ell$) and a $\gamma$ is radiated from
394: % the $W$, the lepton, or an initial-state quark~\cite{CDF_WZgamma}.
395: The number of such events is estimated
396: using leading-order (LO) event
397: generators~\cite{MadGraph,Baur,CompHep}. Initial state radiation is
398: simulated by the {\sc pythia} shower Monte Carlo (MC) code~\cite{Pythia}
399: tuned to reproduce the underlying event. The generated particles
400: are then passed through a full detector simulation, and these
401: events are then reconstructed with the same code used
402: for the data.
403:
404: The expected contributions from $\Wg$ and $\Zgstar\plus\gamma$
405: production to the $\lgmet$ and $\llg$ searches are given in
406: Table~\ref{summary_table}. A correction for higher-order processes (K-factor)
407: %that depends on both the dilepton mass and photon $\Et$
408: has been applied~\cite{Baur_NLO}. In the $\lgmet$ signature we expect
409: %22.54 $\pm$ 2.80 events from $\Wg$ and 5.65 $\pm$ 1.03 from
410: 22.5 $\pm$ 2.8 events from $\Wg$ and 5.7 $\pm$ 1.0 from
411: $\Zgstar\plus\gamma$. In the $\llg$ signature, we expect
412: %20.31 $\pm$ 2.40 events from $\Zgstar\plus\gamma$; the contribution from
413: 20.3 $\pm$ 2.4 events from $\Zgstar\plus\gamma$; the contribution from
414: $\Wg$ is negligible. The uncertainties on the SM contributions include
415: those from parton distribution functions (5\%), factorization scale
416: (2\%), and K-factor (3\%), a comparison of different MC generators
417: ($\sim$ 5\%), and the luminosity (6\%).
418:
419: \input{lgx_runii_table_long}
420:
421: High $\Pt$ photons are copiously created from hadron decays in jets
422: initiated by a scattered quark or gluon. In particular, mesons such as
423: the $\pi^0$ or $\eta$ decay to photons which may satisfy the
424: photon selection criteria. The numbers of
425: lepton-plus-misidentified-jet events expected in the $\lgmet$ and
426: $\llg$ samples are determined by measuring the jet $\Et$ spectrum in
427: $\ell\,\met+$jet and $\ell\ell+$jet samples, respectively, and then
428: multiplying by the probability of a jet being misidentified as a
429: photon, $P^{jet}_{\gamma}(\Et)$, which is measured in data samples
430: triggered on jets.
431: %The uncertainty on the number of such events is
432: %calculated by using the measured jet spectrum and the upper and lower
433: %bounds on the $\Et$-dependent misidentification rate.
434: The misidentification rate is
435: $P^{jet}_{\gamma}=(6.5~\pm~3.3)\times10^{-4}$ for $\Et^{\gamma} = 25$
436: $\GeV$, and $(4.0~\pm~4.0)\times10^{-4}$ for $\Et^{\gamma} = 50$
437: $\GeV$ ~\cite{CDF_WZgamma}.
438: The predicted number of events with jets misidentified as photons is
439: 4.4 $\pm$ 4.4 for the $\lgmet$ signature and 0.5 $\pm$ 0.5 for
440: $\llg$.
441:
442: The probability that an electron undergoes hard bremsstrahlung
443: and is misidentified as a photon, $P^{e}_{\gamma}$, is measured from the
444: photon control sample.
445: %control subsample of back-to-back $e\gamma$ events consistent with
446: %originating from $Z^{0}\rightarrow e^+e^-$ production.
447: The number of
448: misidentified $\eg$ events divided by twice the number of
449: $ee$ events gives $P^{e}_{\gamma}$=(1.7 $\pm$ 0.1)\%.
450: Applying this misidentification rate to electrons in the inclusive
451: %lepton samples, we find 2.45 $\pm$ 0.33 and 0.23 $\pm$ 0.09 events pass
452: lepton samples, we find 2.5 $\pm$ 0.3 and 0.2 $\pm$ 0.1 events pass
453: the selection criteria for the $\lgmet$ and $\llg$ searches,
454: respectively.
455:
456: We have estimated the background due to events with jets misidentified
457: as $\lgmet$ or $\llg$ signatures by studying the total $\Pt$ of tracks
458: in a cone in $\eta-\varphi$ space of radius $R=0.4$ around the lepton
459: track. We estimate there are 1.0 $\pm$ 0.8 and 1.6 $\pm$ 1.2 events in
460: the $\lgmet$ and $\llg$ signatures, respectively.
461:
462: We have used both {\sc madgraph}~\cite{MadGraph} and {\sc comphep}\cite{CompHep}
463: to simulate the triboson channels $\Wgg$ and $Z\gamma\gamma$. The
464: expected contributions are small, 0.32 $\pm$ 0.03 and
465: 0.36 $\pm$ 0.04 events in the $\lgmet$ and $\llg$ signatures,
466: respectively.
467:
468: Muon backgrounds from hadrons either decaying in-flight or penetrating
469: the iron before the muon chambers, and from the decay of bottom and
470: charm quarks, are found to be negligible.
471:
472: The predicted and observed totals for both the $\lgmet$ and $\llg$
473: searches are shown in Table~\ref{summary_table}. We observe
474: $\ntotlgammamet$ $\lgmet$ events, versus the expectation of 37.3 $\pm$
475: 5.4 events. In the $\llg$ channel, we observe $\ntotllg$ events,
476: versus an expectation of 23.0 $\pm$ 2.7 events. There is no
477: significant excess in either signature. The predicted and observed
478: kinematic distributions are compared in Figure~\ref{figure1} for the
479: $\lgmet$ signature, and Figures~\ref{figure2} and \ref{figure3} for
480: the $\llg$ search.
481:
482: In conclusion, we have repeated the search for inclusive lepton +
483: photon production with the same kinematic requirements as the Run I
484: search, but with a significantly larger data sample and a higher
485: collision energy. We find that the numbers of events in the $\lgmet$
486: and $\llg$ subsamples of the $\lgX$ sample agree with SM
487: predictions. We observe no $\llg$ events with anomalous large $\met$
488: or with multiple photons and so find no events like the $\eeggmet$
489: event of Run I.
490:
491: \begin{acknowledgments}
492:
493: We thank the Fermilab staff and the technical staffs of the
494: participating institutions for their vital contributions. Uli Baur,
495: Alexander Belyaev, Edward Boos, Lev Dudko, Tim Stelzer, and Steve
496: Mrenna were extraordinarily helpful with the SM predictions. This
497: work was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy and National
498: Science Foundation; the Italian Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare;
499: the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of
500: Japan; the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of
501: Canada; the National Science Council of the Republic of China; the
502: Swiss National Science Foundation; the A.P. Sloan Foundation; the
503: Bundesministerium f\"ur Bildung und Forschung, Germany; the Korean
504: Science and Engineering Foundation and the Korean Research Foundation;
505: the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council and the Royal
506: Society, UK; the Russian Foundation for Basic Research; the Comisi\'on
507: Interministerial de Ciencia y Tecnolog\'{\i}a, Spain; in part by the
508: European Community's Human Potential Programme under contract
509: HPRN-CT-2002-00292; and the Academy of Finland.
510: \end{acknowledgments}
511:
512: %====YOUAREHERE===============================\\
513: %\clearpage
514: %\newpage
515:
516: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
517:
518: \bibitem{Toback_all}
519: F.~Abe \textit{et al.} (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D \textbf{59},
520: 092002 (1999); F.~Abe \textit{et al.} (CDF Collaboration),
521: Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{81}, 1791 (1998); D.~Toback, Ph.D. thesis,
522: University of Chicago, 1997.
523:
524: %\bibitem{Toback_PRD}
525: %F.~Abe \textit{et al.} (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D \textbf{59},
526: %092002 (1999); hep-ex/9806034.
527: %
528: %\bibitem{Toback_PRL} F.~Abe \textit{et al.} (CDF Collaboration),
529: %Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{81}, 1791 (1998); hep-ex/9801019.
530: %
531: %\bibitem{Toback_thesis} D.~Toback, Ph.D. thesis, University of Chicago, 1997.
532:
533: \bibitem{EtPt} Transverse momentum and energy are defined as $\Pt =
534: p\sin\theta$ and $\Et = E\sin\theta$, respectively.
535: %
536: Missing $\rm E_T$ ($\metvec$) is defined by $\metvec = -\sum_{i} E_T^i
537: \hat{n}_i$, where i is the calorimeter tower number for $|\eta| <$ 3.6
538: (see Ref.~\cite{CDF_coo}), and $\hat{n}_i$ is a unit vector
539: perpendicular to the beam axis and pointing at the i$^{th}$
540: tower. We correct $\metvec$ for jets and muons. We define
541: %calorimeter tower. We correct $\metvec$ for jets and muons. We define
542: the magnitude $\met=|\metvec|$.
543: %
544: We use the convention that ``momentum'' refers to $pc$ and ``mass'' to $mc^2$.
545:
546: \bibitem{SM} S.L.~Glashow,
547: Nucl. Phys. {\bf 22} 588, (1961); S. Weinberg,
548: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 19} 1264, (1967);
549: A. Salam, Proc. 8th Nobel Symposium, Stockholm, (1979).
550:
551: \bibitem{susy}
552: S.~Ambrosanio, G.L.~Kane, G.D.~Kribs, S.P.~Martin, and S.~Mrenna,
553: Phys. Rev. D \textbf{55}, 1372 (1997); B.C.~Allanach, S.~Lola,
554: K.~Sridhar, Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{89}, 011801 (2002).
555:
556: \bibitem{excited_electron}
557: %Search for Excited and Exotic Electrons in the e gamma Decay Channel
558: %in p anti-p Collisions at s**(1/2) = 1.96 TeV
559: D. Acosta \textit{et al.} (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{94},
560: 101802 (2005).
561:
562: \bibitem{Jeff_PRD}
563: D. Acosta \textit{et al.} (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D
564: \textbf{66}, 012004 (2002); hep-ex/0110015.
565:
566: \bibitem{Jeff_PRL}
567: D. Acosta \textit{et al.} (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{89},
568: 041802 (2002); hep-ex/0202004.
569:
570: \bibitem{Jeff_thesis}
571: J.~Berryhill, Ph.D. thesis, University of Chicago, 2000.
572:
573: \bibitem{CDFII}
574: D. Acosta \textit{et al.} (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D \textbf{71}, 032001
575: (2005).
576:
577: %\bibitem{CDFII} The CDF Collaboration, CDF-II Technical Design Report,
578: %FERMILAB-PUB-96/390-E (1996).
579:
580: \bibitem{CDFI}
581: F. Abe \textit{et al.} (CDF Collaboration),
582: Nucl. Instrum. Methods A \textbf{271}, 387 (1988).
583:
584: \bibitem{COT}
585: A. Affolder \textit{et al.},
586: Nucl. Instrum. Methods A \textbf{526}, 249 (2004).
587:
588: \bibitem{SVX}
589: A. Sill \textit{et al.},
590: Nucl. Instrum. Methods A \textbf{447}, 1 (2000);
591: A. Affolder \textit{et al.},
592: Nucl. Instrum. Methods A \textbf{453}, 84 (2000);
593: C.S. Hill,
594: Nucl. Instrum. Methods A \textbf{530}, 1 (2000).
595:
596: \bibitem{CDF_coo} The CDF coordinate system of
597: $r$, $\varphi$, and $z$ is cylindrical, with the $z$-axis along the
598: proton beam. The pseudorapidity is $\eta = -\ln(\tan(\theta/2))$.
599:
600: \bibitem{cal_upgrade} S. Kuhlmann \textit{et al.},
601: Nucl. Instrum. Methods A \textbf{518}, 39, 2004.
602:
603: \bibitem{muon_systems}
604: The CMU system consists of %a central barrel of
605: gas proportional
606: chambers in the region $|\eta|<0.6$; the CMP system consists of
607: chambers after an additional meter of steel, also for
608: $|\eta|<0.6$. The CMX chambers cover %the region between
609: $0.6<|\eta|<1.0$.
610:
611: %\bibitem{muon_track_quality} For tight muons and tight electrons at
612: %least 5 hits in each of 3 axial and 3 stereo layers of the COT are
613: %required; for loose muons with a matching muon stub this is relaxed to
614: %3 axial and 2 stereo. Loose muons without a matching stub have an
615: %additional cut on the $\chi ^2$ for the fit to the track.
616:
617: %\bibitem{pt100} The $\Pt$ cut is raised to 25 $\GeV$ for $\Et > 100$ $\GeV$.
618:
619: \bibitem{hadoem}
620: The fraction of electromagnetic energy allowed to leak into the hadron
621: compartment $\rm E_{had}/E_{em}$ must be less than $\rm
622: 0.055\plus0.00045\times E_{em}(\GeV)$ for central electrons, less than
623: 0.05 for electrons in the end-plug calorimeters, less than max[0.125,
624: $\rm 0.055\plus0.00045\times E_{em}(\GeV)$] for photons.
625:
626: %for photons: $0.055+0.00045E_{em}$ or 0.125
627: %for plug: 0.05
628: %for electrons: $0.055+0.00045E_{em}$
629:
630: \bibitem{jet_corr}
631: A. Bhatti \textit{et al.}, submitted to
632: Nucl. Instrum. Methods,
633: Oct. 2005; hep-ex/0510047.
634:
635: \bibitem{wenu_asymmetry_paper}
636: %Measurement of the Forward-Backward Charge Asymmetry from W --> e nu Production in p anti-p Collisions at s**(1/2) = 1.96 TeV
637: D.~Acosta \textit{et al.} (CDF Collaboration),
638: Phys. Rev. D \textbf{71}, 051104 (2005); hep-ex/0501023.
639:
640: \bibitem{CDF_WZgamma}
641: %Measurement of W gamma and Z gamma Production in p anti-p Collisions at s**(1/2) = 1.96 TeV
642: D. Acosta \textit{et al.} (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{94},
643: 041803 (2005).
644:
645: \bibitem{MadGraph}
646: T. Stelzer and W. F. Long, Comput. Phys. Commun. \textbf{81}, 357
647: (1994); F. Maltoni and T. Stelzer, JHEP \textbf{302}, 27 (2003).
648: %hep-ph/0208156. We designate the production of lepton pairs through
649: %the Drell-Yan process, including both the $\Z$ and $\gamma$
650: %amplitudes, as $\Zgstar$ in signatures such as $\pbarp \goes
651: %\Zgstar\plus\gamma\goes\epem\gamma$.
652:
653: %Baur LO ref.
654: \bibitem{Baur}
655: U. Baur, T. Han, and J. Ohnemus,
656: Phys. Rev. D \textbf{48}, 5140 (1993);
657: J. Ohnemus, Phys. Rev. D \textbf{47}, 940 (1993).
658:
659: \bibitem{CompHep}
660: %A.~Pukhov {\it et al.}; hep-ph/9908288;
661: E. Boos \textit{et al.} (The {\sc comphep} Collaboration),
662: Nucl. Instrum. Methods A \textbf{534}, 250, (2004); hep-ph/0403113.
663:
664: \bibitem{Pythia}
665: T.~Sjostrand, Comput. Phys. Commun. \textbf{82} (1994) 74;
666: S.~Mrenna, Comput. Phys. Commun. \textbf{101} (1997) 232.
667:
668: %Baur NLO ref.
669: \bibitem{Baur_NLO} U.~Baur, T.~Han and J.~Ohnemus,
670: %``QCD corrections to hadronic W gamma production with nonstandard W W gamma
671: %couplings,''
672: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 48}, 5140 (1993);
673: % [arXiv:hep-ph/9305314];
674: U.~Baur, T.~Han and J.~Ohnemus,
675: %``QCD corrections and anomalous couplings in Z gamma production at hadron
676: %colliders,''
677: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 57}, 2823 (1998); hep-ph/9710416.
678: Both the $\Wg$ and $Z\gamma$ K-factors are fixed at 1.36 for generated
679: $\ell\nu$ masses below 76 $\GeV$ and for generated $\lplm$ masses below
680: 86 $\GeV$. Above the poles the K-factors grow with $\Et^{\gamma}$ to
681: be 1.62 and 1.53 at $\Et^{\gamma}=100$ $\GeV$ for $\Wg$ and $Z\gamma$,
682: respectively.
683:
684: \end{thebibliography}
685:
686: \end{document}
687:
688: