1: \chapter{Experimental setups and techniques} \label{chap:exp}
2: %
3: Deep inelastic scattering (DIS) experiments can roughly be regrouped into three
4: generations. The first generation of fixed-target experiments
5: between 1968 and the mid-1970s has played an essential role in establishing
6: the point-like substructure of the nucleons and in discovering the underlying
7: weak neutral current interactions. The second generation of fixed-target
8: experiments of higher energies and precision has helped in
9: establishing and testing the quantum chromodynamics (QCD) and in providing
10: data for extracting a first set of parton distribution functions.
11: A list of selected DIS experiments is briefly presented in Sec.\ref{sec:fte}
12: after having introduced the kinematics in Sec.\ref{sec:kine}. The
13: third generation experiments at HERA $ep$ collider are described
14: in more detail in the later sections.
15:
16: \section{Kinematics of deep inelastic scattering} \label{sec:kine}
17: %
18: The kinematics of the inclusive DIS processes for neutral current
19: (NC) interaction $lp\rightarrow lX$ and charged current (CC) interaction
20: $ep\rightarrow \nu X$ or $\nu p\rightarrow lX$ (Fig.\ref{fig:kinedia})
21: \begin{figure}[htb]
22: \begin{center}
23: \begin{picture}(50,130)
24: \put(-320,-240){\epsfig{file=kine_dia.eps,width=200mm}}
25: \end{picture}
26: \end{center}
27: \caption{\sl Schematic diagrams of lepton ($l$) and proton ($p$) scattering
28: via photon and $Z$ exchange for NC and $W$ exchange for CC. The four
29: momentum vectors of the particles or particle systems are given in
30: parentheses.}
31: \label{fig:kinedia}
32: \end{figure}
33: at the given center-of-mass energy squared, $s=(k+P)^2$, is determined by two
34: independent Lorentz invariant variables, which could be any of following
35: variables:
36: \begin{eqnarray}
37: Q^2=-q^2=(k-k^\prime)^2\,,& & Q^2\in \left[0,s\right],\label{eq:q2}\\
38: x=\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{2P\cdot q}\,,& &
39: x\in\left[0,1\right],\\
40: y=\displaystyle \frac{q\cdot P}{k\cdot P}\,,& & y\in\left[0,1\right],\\
41: W^2=(q+P)^2\,,& & W^2\in\left[M^2_p,s\right].\label{eq:w2}
42: \end{eqnarray}
43: The square of the four momentum transfer (the invariant mass of the exchanged
44: vector boson), $q^2<0$, is space-like and determines the hardness of
45: the interaction, or in other words, the resolving power of the interaction.
46: The Bjorken variable $x$
47: is interpreted as the fraction of the proton momentum carried by the struck
48: parton in the quark parton model (QPM). The variable $y$ measures the
49: inelasticity of the interaction and its distribution reflects the spin
50: structure of the interaction in the rest frame of the target.
51:
52: The variable $\nu$
53: \begin{equation}
54: \nu=\frac{q\cdot P}{M}\, \label{eq:nu}
55: \end{equation}
56: is often used in fixed-target experiments where $\nu=E-E^\prime$ and $M$
57: is the target mass.
58:
59: \newpage
60: \section{The fixed-target experiments} \label{sec:fte}
61: %
62: Fixed-target DIS experiments may be divided into two classes
63: depending on the nature of the probe used, which in turn determines
64: the force involved.
65: In electroproduction, electrons or muons are scattered off
66: the target nucleon and the force involved is electromagnetic.
67: The leading process of the scattering is that of single-photon ($\gamma$)
68: exchange. The second class of processes
69: is called neutrinoproduction and, in this, neutrinos are scattered off the
70: target nucleons by the weak force. The leading process is that of
71: single-$W$-boson exchange for charged current interactions and of
72: single-$Z^0$-boson exchange for neutral current interactions.
73:
74: The earlier electroproduction experiments used electrons as probe. However
75: due to their large synchrotron radiation, the largest electron energy used
76: for scattering experiments was limited to about 12\,GeV (Cornell) and 26\,GeV
77: (SLAC). The kinematic range was extended by muon-nucleon scattering
78: to higher energies ($20<E<500$\,GeV).
79:
80: The neutrinoproduction experiments complement the charged lepton scattering
81: experiments and comparisons between neutrino and charged lepton deep
82: inelastic experiments provide tests of universality of the parton density
83: functions. In addition, the neutrinoproduction experiments are unique as
84: they are able to distinguish quark flavors within target nucleons
85: (Sec.\ref{sec:qpm}).
86: On the other hand, these experiments were in practice difficult to
87: realize as the electrically neutral, weakly interacting neutrinos cannot be
88: directed by electric and magnetic fields, as can electrons; and building a
89: usable neutrino beam is a complicated process. First, a primary beam of
90: protons is accelerated to high energy and is made to collide with a
91: stationary target such as a piece of iron. From these collisions, a host of
92: secondary particles, mainly mesons, will emerge in the general direction of
93: the incident proton beam, although with somewhat smaller energies. These
94: secondary mesons can then decay into neutrinos or antineutrinos and various
95: other particles by decays such as $\pi^\pm \rightarrow \mu^\pm + \nu_\mu
96: (\overline{\nu}_\mu)$. Because the muon-decay mode of the mesons is
97: generally the most common, it is mainly muon-type neutrinos which make up
98: the beam. Finally, the neutrinos are isolated by guiding the secondary beam
99: through a barrier of steel and rock equivalent of, perhaps, 0.5\,km of earth.
100: Only the weakly interacting neutrinos can pass through this amount of matter
101: and so the beam emerging from the far side of the barrier is a pure neutrino
102: beam with a typical intensity of about $10^9$ particles per second.
103: Two types of high energy beams are commonly used: narrow band beams with
104: a momentum and charge selection of the secondary beam, and wide band beams
105: without such selection. The narrow band beams provide a measurement of
106: the incident neutrino energy and flux. Furthermore, the beams are either
107: almost purely neutrino or almost purely antineutrino, with little cross
108: contamination. Wide band beams provide an order of magnitude more neutrinos;
109: however, there is no direct check on the event neutrino energy and no direct
110: measure of the flux.
111: %Unfortunately, the initial proton-target collisions and the subsequent decays
112: %energy of the neutrino beam is rather uncertain and often must be inferred
113: %by adding up the energies of the products of the neutrino-nucleon interactions
114: %under study.
115:
116: A few selected fixed-target DIS experiments are listed in Table \ref{tab:fte}.
117: \begin{table}[tb]
118: \begin{center}
119: \begin{minipage}{14cm}
120: \caption{\sl A list of
121: selected fixed-target DIS experiments. Only the main targets used are
122: indicated with $p$, $d$, and Fe standing respectively for proton, deuterium,
123: and iron targets (the use of heavy nuclear targets have the advantage
124: of high rate).}
125: \label{tab:fte}
126: \end{minipage}
127: \begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|c|l|}
128: \hline
129: Experiment & Year & Reaction & Beam Energy (GeV) & Reference \\\hline
130: SLAC-MIT & 1968 & $ep,ed$ & 4.5-20 & \cite{slac68,slac69,tayler69,slac72}
131: \\\hline
132: DESY & 1969 & $ep$ & 6 & \cite{desy69,desy69b} \\\hline
133: Gargamelle$^\ast$ & 1971-1976 & $\nu_\mu (\overline{\nu}_\mu)p(d)$ & $<10$ &
134: \cite{hasert73} \\\hline
135: SLAC & 1974-1975 & $\mu$ Fe & 56.3, 150 & \cite{sv_slac} \\\hline
136: BEBC$^\ast$ & 1975-1983 & $\nu_\mu (\overline{\nu}_\mu)p(d)$ & $<200$ &
137: \cite{bosetti78} \\\hline
138: Fermilab & 1977-1978 & $\mu p$ & 47, 96, 219 & \cite{sv_fermi} \\\hline
139: CDHS & 1979-1990 & $\nu_\mu (\overline{\nu}_\mu)$ Fe & $<200$
140: & \cite{abramowicz82} \\\hline
141: %CHARM & & $\nu$ & & \\\hline
142: CCFR & 1979-1988 & $\nu_\mu (\overline{\nu}_\mu)$ Fe & $\leq 600$ &
143: \cite{ccfr97} \\\hline
144: BCDMS & 1981-1985 & $\mu p, \mu d$ & 100,120,200,280 & \cite{bcdms89} \\\hline
145: NMC & 1986-1989 & $\mu p, \mu d$ & 90,120,200,280 & \cite{nmc97} \\\hline
146: E665 & 1987-1992 & $\mu p, \mu d$ & 470 & \cite{e665} \\\hline
147: \multicolumn{5}{l}{\begin{minipage}{13.2cm}{$^\ast$ The Gargamelle and BEBC
148: (Big European Bubble Chamber) experiments used bubble chambers while
149: other cited experiments used electronic detectors. The bubble chambers have
150: opted for wide-band beams that maximize neutrino flux.}\end{minipage}}
151: \end{tabular}
152: \end{center}
153: \end{table}
154: The early fixed-target experiments between 1968 and the mid-1970s have
155: discovered a wealth of information on the structure of the proton, to name a
156: few:
157: \begin{itemize}
158: \item {\bf Point-like constituents:} The approximate independence of
159: the measured structure functions of $Q^2$~\cite{slac68,slac69,desy69,slac72}
160: indicated scattering off point-like constituents analogous to the classic
161: Rutherford experiment on atomic structure.
162: \item {\bf Quark spin:} The near vanishing of $F_L$ in electron-nucleon
163: scattering~\cite{tayler69,desy69b} supported the assignment of half-integer
164: spin for the quarks.
165: \item {\bf Fractional charge:} The comparison of structure functions in
166: electron and neutrino scattering reactions supported the assignment of
167: fractional charges to the quarks.
168: \item {\bf Scaling violations and QCD:}
169: The muon scattering experiments at high energies provided first evidences
170: for scaling violations~\cite{sv_slac,sv_fermi}. The scaling violations of the
171: DIS data have helped in establishing the theory of QCD (Sec.\ref{sec:qcd}).
172: %strong sector of the Standard Model.
173: \item {\bf Gluon:} The momentum sum rules in both electron- and neutrino-proton
174: scattering~\cite{perkins75} suggested that quarks carry only about half of
175: the total proton momentum. The other half was thought to be carried by
176: neutral gluons, the quanta of the interquark field force.
177: %\item {\bf Universality of the parton density functions:} The comparison of
178: %different structure functions and different DIS processes also suggests that
179: %the parton density functions are universal.
180: \end{itemize}
181: The neutrino scattering experiments have played other particular roles:
182: \begin{itemize}
183: \item {\bf Discovery of neutral currents:} The first observations of neutral
184: currents were reported by the Gargamelle Collaboration~\cite{hasert73}.
185: This was the first experimental success of the electroweak theory of the
186: Standard Model.
187: \item {\bf Precise measurement of $\sin\theta_W$:} Before the advent of LEP
188: and SLC, the electroweak mixing parameter $\sin\theta_W$ was best measured
189: by the neutrino scattering experiments with a first result
190: ($\sin\theta_W=0.28\pm 0.05$)~\cite{brisson76} already in 1976 leading to
191: a $W$ mass value of 70\,GeV~\cite{gayler95} well before the direct
192: observation of the $W$ boson in early 1980s.
193: \item {\bf First experimental hint of charm:} Neutrino productions of
194: opposite-sign dimuon $(\mu^-\mu^+)$ in subprocesses $\nu_\mu+(d,s)
195: \rightarrow \mu^- + c +X$ and $\overline{\nu}_\mu+(\overline{d},\overline{s})
196: \rightarrow \mu^+ + \overline{c} +X$ (the second muon arises from the
197: semileptonic decay of the charmed hadrons emerged from the charged quark $c$)
198: provided a first experimental hint of charm~\cite{rubbia}.
199: \item {\bf Strange quark sea and evidence for an $SU(3)$ asymmetric flavor
200: sea:} The subprocess $\overline{\nu}_\mu + \overline{s}\rightarrow \mu^+ +
201: \overline{c}+X$ offered a unique probe to measure the strange component of
202: the nuclear sea. The subprocess $\nu_\mu+(d,s) \rightarrow \mu^- + c +X$
203: provided a measure of the momentum fraction carried by the strange sea quarks
204: relative to that carried by the non-strange sea
205: $s/(\overline{u}+\overline{d})$ revealing an asymmetric strange sea.
206: \item {\bf Unique direct measurement of $|V_{cd}|$:} The Cabibbo suppressed
207: subprocess $\nu_\mu+d\rightarrow \mu^-+c+X$ has been the only direct
208: measurement of the Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix element
209: $|V_{cd}|$~\cite{abramowicz82}.
210: \end{itemize}
211:
212: During the last decade, several precise data have been published and a few
213: old data have been reanalyzed.
214: A number of previously observed discrepancies between different experiments
215: have been resolved. For a recent review, see Ref.\cite{cooper97}.
216:
217: \newpage
218: \section{The HERA accelerator} \label{sec:hera}
219: %
220: The HERA project was authorized in April 1984 and the construction was
221: completed late 1990 in accordance with the original time schedule.
222: The layout of the HERA accelerator and its preaccelerator facilities is
223: shown schematically in Fig.\ref{fig:hera}.
224: The electrons and protons are injected into HERA from PETRA (a previous
225: $e^+e^-$ collider) with $14\,{\rm GeV}$ and $40\,{\rm GeV}$ respectively.
226: HERA is a double ring collider.
227: \begin{figure}[htb]
228: \begin{center}
229: \begin{picture}(50,175)
230: \put(-155,-280){\epsfig{file=hera.eps,bbllx=0pt,bblly=0pt,bburx=594pt,
231: bbury=842pt,width=130mm}}
232: \put(43.6,70){\fcolorbox{white}{white}{\textcolor{white}{\tiny aaa}}}
233: \put(43.6,70){\tiny {\sc hera}-b}
234: \end{picture}
235: \end{center}
236: \caption{\sl The layout of the HERA accelerator and its preaccelerator
237: facilities.}
238: \label{fig:hera}
239: \end{figure}
240: The electron ring is made of supercoducting cavities and normal conducting
241: magnets for accelerating the electrons of 14\,GeV up to the nominal electron
242: energy of $30\,{\rm GeV}$.
243: The electron ring provides either electron or positron beam\footnote{In the
244: following, the generic name electron is used for electrons as well as for
245: positrons unless stated otherwise.}. The year-dependent
246: lepton-beam charges and energies are shown in Table \ref{tab:hera_year}.
247: The actual maximum electron beam energy of $27.5\,{\rm GeV}$
248: is limited by the maximum available radio frequency ({\sc rf}) voltage.
249: The proton ring consists of conventional {\sc rf} cavities and superconducting
250: magnets of 4.68\,Tesla magnetic field for accelerating the protons from
251: 40\,GeV to 820\,GeV, maintaining them at this energy and keeping them on orbit.
252: The quality of the magnets is such that it is possible to rise the strength of
253: the magnetic field up to 5.8\,Tesla, which would correspond to 1\,TeV proton
254: beam.
255: \begin{table}[tb]
256: \begin{center}
257: \begin{minipage}{10.3cm}
258: \caption{\sl The year-dependent lepton-beam charges and energies and the
259: corresponding center-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}$ of the HERA collider.}
260: \label{tab:hera_year}
261: \end{minipage}
262: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
263: \hline
264: Year & $e^\pm$ beam & $E_e$ (GeV) & $E_p$ (GeV) & $\sqrt{s}$ (GeV) \\\hline
265: 1992-93 & $e^-$ & 26.7 & 820 & 296 \\\hline
266: 1994 & $\begin{array}{c} e^- \\ e^+ \end{array}$ & 27.5 & 820 & 300 \\\hline
267: 1995-97 & $e^+$ & 27.5 & 820 & 300 \\\hline
268: 1998 & $e^-$ & 27.5 & 920 & 320 \\\hline
269: 1999 & $\begin{array}{c} e^- \\ e^+ \end{array}$ & 27.5 & 920 & 320 \\\hline
270: 2000 & $e^+$ & 27.5 & 920 & 320 \\\hline
271: \end{tabular}
272: \end{center}
273: \end{table}
274:
275: HERA has four straight sections (interaction points) spaced evenly
276: around its $6.3\,{\rm km}$ circumference.
277: The electron and proton beams collide head-on in two of these points
278: occupied by two general purpose detectors H1~\cite{h1det} (Sec.\ref{sec:h1det})
279: and ZEUS~\cite{zeusdet}.
280: Two fixed-target experiments HERMES~\cite{hermesweb} and
281: HERA-B~\cite{herabweb} are located at the other
282: two interaction regions. At HERMES spin rotator provide the longitudinally
283: polarized electron beam in collision with a polarized gas target for studying
284: spin dependent structure functions, while HERA-B uses the halo of the
285: proton beam with wire targets in an attempt to detecte CP violation
286: in the $B$ system.
287:
288: HERA has made steady progress since 1992.
289: This can be seen from Fig.\ref{fig:heralumi} in which the time evolution of
290: the following information is shown: (1) the peak luminosity, (2) the
291: integrated luminosity collected by H1, (3) the mean as well as maximum
292: lepton and proton beam currents, and (4) the number of colliding bunches.
293: \begin{figure}[htb]
294: \begin{center}
295: \begin{picture}(50,350)
296: \put(-200,-150){\epsfig{file=lumi.ps,bbllx=0pt,bblly=0pt,
297: bburx=594pt,bbury=842pt,width=16cm}}
298: \end{picture}
299: \end{center}
300: \caption{\sl The time evolution of the following information: (1) the peak luminosity, (2) the
301: integrated luminosity collected by H1, (3) the mean as well as maximum
302: lepton and proton beam currents, and (4) the number of colliding bunches.}
303: \label{fig:heralumi}
304: \end{figure}
305: A comparison of the best achieved and design values of the main HERA
306: parameters is shown in Table \ref{tab:hera_para}.
307: \begin{table}[tb]
308: \begin{center}
309: \begin{minipage}{7.8cm}
310: \caption{\sl The main HERA parameters achieved so far compared with the
311: design values.}
312: \label{tab:hera_para}
313: \end{minipage}
314: \begin{tabular}{|l|r|r|}
315: \hline
316: Parameter & Design & Achieved \\\hline
317: $I_e$ (mA) & 58 & 51.8 \\\hline
318: $I_p$ (mA) & 160 & 109 \\\hline
319: $\sharp$ bunches & 210 & 189 \\\hline
320: $\sigma^p_x$ at IP ($\mu$m) & 280 & 179 \\\hline
321: $\sigma^p_y$ at IP ($\mu$m) & 50 & 48 \\\hline
322: $\sigma^p_z$ at IP (cm) & 11 & 11 \\\hline
323: ${\cal L}_{\rm inst}$ (10$^{31}$ cm$^{-2}$s$^{-1}$) & 1.5 & 1.8 \\\hline
324: \end{tabular}
325: \end{center}
326: \end{table}
327: %The luminosity profiles are comparable to those achieved at other
328: %successful accelerator facilities such as LEP or the Tevatron.
329: The improvement of the luminosity as a function of time can be understood
330: from the formula:
331: \begin{equation}
332: {\cal L}\propto \frac{I_eI_p}{\sigma_x\sigma_y}\,.
333: \end{equation}
334: The improvement in 1993 with respect to 1992 was mainly due to the increases
335: in the beam currents; from 0.94 to $10.8\,{\rm mA}$ for protons and from
336: 1.33 to $7.7\,{\rm mA}$ for electrons. This was achieved mainly by
337: increasing the number of colliding bunches from 9 in 1992 up to 84 in 1993.
338: %(the number of colliding bunches increased from 9 to 84).
339: During the summer of 1994, the electron beam was replaced by a
340: positron beam which has considerably improved the beam lifetime\footnote{The
341: electron lifetime was severely limited due to presumably its interaction with
342: positively ionized impurities in the beam pipe. To cure the problem,
343: the original ion getter pumps of the electron ring have been replaced
344: in the 1997/1998 shutdown by passive non-evaporating getter pumps
345: (adsorption pumps without high voltage that do not accelerate dust particles
346: into the beam vacuum).} at high currents.
347: The number of colliding bunches have increased subsequently to 153 in 1994
348: and then to about 175 since 1995 with a maximum number of 189.
349: In addition to these colliding bunches, some
350: bunches are left unpaired (so-called pilot bunches, i.e. the corresponding
351: bunch in the other beam is empty). These pilot bunches are used for
352: evaluating the beam related backgrounds both for the luminosity determination
353: and for physics analyses. Two successive bunches are separated in time by $96\,{\rm ns}$.
354: This is to be compared with the collision frequency of $22\,\mu{\rm s}$ and
355: 25\,ns respectively at LEP\footnote{The number corresponds to four bunches
356: per $e^\pm$ beam during the early (late) run of 1989-1992 (1996-2000), the
357: collision frequency was reduced by a factor of two or more by increasing
358: the number of bunches for the years between 1992 and 1995.} and LHC.
359:
360: Other improvements include
361: \begin{itemize}
362: \item the full exploitation in the aperture
363: margin of the machine in order to
364: squeeze the beam cross sections at the collision point down
365: to $179\,\mu{\rm m}\times 48\,\mu{\rm m}$, which are two times smaller
366: than the design value,
367: \item significant progress in the proton beam intensity
368: by improving controls and beam handling in the injector chain. The
369: maximum proton beam current achieved in $ep$ collisions is now
370: $109\,{\rm mA}$ (or $\sim 8\times 10^{10}$ protons per bunch).
371: %which is $76\%$ of the design value.
372: \end{itemize}
373: The maximum electron current obtained is 51.8\,mA.
374: %The actual limitation is caused by problems with the superconducting cavity
375: %system which develops sparking in the input coupler for large {\sc rf} power
376: %and large beam current.
377: The beam current is limited by the available {\sc rf} power.
378: Therefore, although the beam currents still fall short of expectations, the
379: maximum peak luminosity achieved $1.8\times 10^{31}\,{\rm cm}^{-2}{\rm s}^{-1}$
380: exceeds the design goal of $1.5\times 10^{31}\,{\rm cm}^{-2}{\rm s}^{-1}$
381: by focusing very tightly the beams at the interaction points.
382:
383: An important ungrading program has been prepared and has started since
384: September 2000. After the upgrade, an increase in the luminosity of
385: more than a factor of 5 is expected~\cite{hera_upgrade}.
386:
387: \newpage
388: \section{The H1 detector} \label{sec:h1det}
389: %
390: The H1 detector~\cite{h1det}
391: (Fig.\ref{fig:h1det}) is nearly hermetic
392: multi-purpose apparatus built to investigate $ep$ interactions at HERA.
393: \begin{figure}[htbp]
394: \begin{center}
395: \begin{picture}(50,270)
396: \put(-160,-15){\epsfig{file=h1det_side.ps,bbllx=0pt,bblly=0pt,bburx=594pt,
397: bbury=842pt,width=100mm,angle=90}}
398: \put(-60,215){\footnotesize {\tt Superconducting Magnet}}
399: \put(-60,211.5){\line(1,0){116}}
400: \put(-55,211.5){\vector(1,-1){37}}
401: \end{picture}
402: \end{center}
403: \caption{\sl An overview of the H1 detector.}
404: \label{fig:h1det}
405: \end{figure}
406: The main components are the tracking detectors (Sec.\ref{sec:tracking}),
407: the calorimetry (Sec.\ref{sec:calorimetry}), the superconducting magnet,
408: the muon detectors (Sec.\ref{sec:muon}), the very forward detectors
409: (Sec.\ref{sec:fwddet}) and the luminosity detectors and various electron
410: taggers (Sec.\ref{sec:lumisyst}).
411: In many aspects, the H1 detector\footnote{The ZEUS detector~\cite{zeusdet}
412: is rather similar to the H1 detector in many aspects. The main difference
413: lies in the main calorimeter; as described in Sec.\ref{sec:calorimetry},
414: the liquid-argon calorimeter of H1 has a fine granularity and
415: a good resolution for electromagnetic objects whereas the uranium-scintillator
416: calorimeter of ZEUS is compensating, giving equal response to hadrons and
417: electrons, and has a good resolution for hadrons
418: ($\sigma(E)/E\simeq 35\%/\sqrt{E}\oplus2\%$).
419: The ZEUS calorimeter has in addition a good time resolution,
420: which is better than 1\,ns for energy deposits greater than 4.5\,GeV
421: thus providing a fast time information for triggers and background rejections.
422: The location of the superconducting coil providing magnetic field for trackers
423: is different as well; the coil of H1 is placed outside of the calorimeter
424: thus minimizing the amount of dead material in front of the calorimeter,
425: while ZEUS had placed it between the calorimeter and the tracker.}
426: does not differ strongly from the detectors
427: at $e^+e^-$ or $p\overline{p}$ colliders. Specific at HERA is however the
428: imbalance in the energy of the two colliding beams, which requires an
429: asymmetric detector.
430:
431: The coordinate system convention for the experiment defines $x$ pointing to
432: the center of the HERA ring, $y$ the upward direction, and the forward,
433: positive $z$ direction as being that of the proton beam. The polar angle
434: $\theta$ is defined relative to this axis such that pseudo-rapidity,
435: $\eta=-\ln \tan\theta/2$, is positive in the forward region.
436:
437: \subsection{The tracking detectors} \label{sec:tracking}
438:
439: The tracking detectors consist of central jet chambers (CJC1, CJC2), central
440: trackers for measuring the $z$ coordinate (CIZ, COZ), central multiwire
441: proportional chambers for fast triggering (CIP, COP), forward tracking detector
442: (FTD), backward tracking detector (BPC, BDC), and central and backward silicon
443: microvertex detectors (CST, BST).
444:
445: The CJC1 and CJC2, covering a polar angular range from 15$^\circ$ to
446: 165$^\circ$, are two large, concentric drift chambers. The inner chamber,
447: CJC1, has 24 layers of sense wires arranged in 30 phi cells, while CJC2 has
448: 32 layers of sense wires in 60 phi cells. The cells are at a 30$^\circ$
449: angle to the radial direction. The point resolution is 170\,$\mu$m in the
450: $r-\phi$ direction. The $z$ coordinate is measured by charge division and
451: has an accuracy of 22\,mm. A superconducting solenoid, which surrounds both
452: the tracking system and the liquid argon (LAr) calorimeter, provides a
453: uniform magnetic field of 1.15\,Tesla. The momentum of charged particles
454: may be determined from their track curvature in the magnetic field with a
455: transverse momentum resolution of $\sigma_{p_T}/p_T< 0.01 p_T$\,GeV.
456: The $dE/dx$ resolution for a well measured track is better than 7\%.
457:
458: Two thin cylindrical drift chambers CIZ and COZ have sense wires perpendicular
459: to the beam axis, and therefore complement the accurate $r-\phi$ measurement
460: provided by the CJC with precise $z$ coordinates. The CIZ is
461: located at 18\,cm inside the CJC1, while COZ is located at 47\,cm
462: between CJC1 and CJC2. These two chambers deliver track elements with
463: typically 300\,$\mu$m resolution in $z$. To each of the $z$ chambers a
464: proportional chambers (CIP/COP) is attached for triggering.
465:
466: The FTD, covering an angular range from 7$^\circ$ to 25$^\circ$, are
467: integrated assemblies of three supermodules, each including, in
468: order of increasing $z$, three different orientations of planar wire drift
469: chambers (each rotated by 60$^\circ$ to each other in azimuth), a multiwire
470: proportional chamber (FPC), a transition radiation
471: detector and a radial wire drift chamber.
472:
473: The backward proportional chamber BPC, located just in front on the backward
474: calorimeter, is made of four planes of wires with vertical, horizontal and
475: $\pm 45^\circ$ orientations. The wires are strung every 2.5\,mm, and signals
476: from two wires are fed to one preamplifier. Three out of four planes are
477: required in coincidence in order to reconstruct a space point with a spatial
478: resolution of about 1.5\,mm in the transverse plane.
479: The BPC provided an angular measurement of the electron in the
480: range from 155$^\circ$ to 174$^\circ$, together with the vertex given by
481: the main tracking detectors with a precision better than 1\,mrad.
482: This detector has been replaced in the 1994/95 shutdown by an eight layer drift
483: chamber BDC with an extended acceptance between 155.1$^\circ$ and
484: 177.5$^\circ$.
485:
486: \subsection{Calorimetry} \label{sec:calorimetry}
487: %
488: The calorimetry system consists of the LAr calorimeter, the backward
489: electromagnetic calorimeter (BEMC/SPACAL), the forward calorimeter (PLUG) and
490: the outer calorimeter, the so-called tail-catcher.
491:
492: The emphasis is put on the electron recognition and energy measurement. This
493: led to placing the LAr inside the magnetic coil in order to minimize the
494: passive material. LAr was chosen because of its good stability, ease of
495: calibration, possibility of fine granularity and homogeneity of response.
496: The LAr calorimeter covers the polar angle range between 3$^\circ$ and
497: 155$^\circ$. The calorimeter along the beam axis is segmented into 8
498: ``wheels'', with each wheel being further segmented into octants in
499: $\phi$ (Fig.\ref{fig:larcell}).
500: \begin{figure}[htbp]
501: \begin{center}
502: \begin{picture}(50,470)
503: \put(-190,150){\epsfig{file=larcalo.ps,bbllx=0pt,bblly=0pt,bburx=594pt,
504: bbury=842pt,width=50mm}}
505: \put(95,350){\vector(0,1){25}}
506: \put(95,350){\vector(-1,0){25}}
507: \put(0,350){\vector(1,0){25}}
508: \put(160,350){\vector(-1,0){25}}
509: \put(60,347.5){$z$}
510: \put(94,377.5){$r$}
511: \put(-12.5,347.5){$e^\pm$}
512: \put(165,347.5){$p$}
513: \put(-170,305){IF}
514: \put(-170,270){$OF$}
515: \put(-52,302.5){FB2}
516: \put(-2.5,302.5){FB1}
517: \put(47.5,302.5){CB3}
518: \put(100,302.5){CB2}
519: \put(145,302.5){CB1}
520: \put(187.5,302.5){BBE}
521: \put(187.5,395){EMC}
522: \put(187.5,445){HAC}
523: \put(-250,-150){\epsfig{file=calo_phi.eps,bbllx=0pt,bblly=0pt,
524: bburx=594pt,bbury=842pt,width=350mm}}
525: \put(44.2,97.5){\vector(0,1){25}}
526: \put(44.2,97.5){\vector(-1,0){25}}
527: \put(10,95){$x$}
528: \put(43,127.5){$y$}
529: \put(-95,95){CB1H}
530: \put(30,58){CB1E}
531: \end{picture}
532: \end{center}
533: \caption{\sl A schematic $r-\phi$ view of the pad structure in different
534: wheels (top) and a transverse view of the pad structure in 8 octants in CB1.}
535: \label{fig:larcell}
536: \end{figure}
537: The structure of the electromagnetic section (EMC) consists of a pile of
538: G10-Pb-G10 sandwiches separated by spacers defining the LAr gaps.
539: The hadronic section (HAC) is made of stainless steel absorber plates
540: with independent readout cells inserted between the plates.
541: The orientation of the plates varies with $z$ such that
542: particles always impact with angles greater than 45$^\circ$.
543: The granularity ranges from 10
544: $\rightarrow$ 100\,cm$^2$ in the EMC section and to 50 $\rightarrow$
545: 2000\,cm$^2$ in the HAC section. Longitudinal segmentation is 3-4 layers in
546: the EMC over 20-30 radiation lengths ($X_0$) and 4-6 layers in the HAC.
547: The total depth of both sections varies between 4.5 and 8 interaction lengths
548: ($\lambda$). The most backward part of the LAr calorimeter is a smaller
549: electromagnetic calorimeter (BBE) which covers the polar angle ranging from
550: 146$^\circ$ to 155$^\circ$. The LAr calorimeter has a total of
551: $45\,000$ readout cells. The noise per cell ranges from 10 to 30\,MeV.
552: The resolution measured in the test beam is $0.12/\sqrt{E({\rm GeV})}\oplus
553: 0.01$ for an electromagnetic shower and $0.5/\sqrt{E({\rm GeV})}\oplus
554: 0.02$ for a hadronic shower (the symbol $\oplus$ denotes addition in
555: quadrature). The electromagnetic and hadronic energy scale uncertainty is
556: respectively 1-3\% and 2-4\%. The calorimeter is non-compensating, with the
557: response to hadrons about 30\% lower than the response to electron of the
558: same energy. An offline weighting technique is used to equalize the response
559: and provide the optimal energy resolution~\cite{gayler85,h1nim336_93b}.
560:
561: In the backward region, the LAr was complemented in the angular range from
562: 151$^\circ$ to 176$^\circ$ by the BEMC, a conventional lead-scintillator
563: sandwich calorimeter. The BEMC was replaced in the 1994/95 shutdown by
564: a lead/scintillating fiber calorimeter (SPACAL). The calorimeter BEMC
565: is made of 88 stacks with a size of
566: $16\times 16\,{\rm cm}^2$ and has a depth of 21.7\,$X_0$, or approximately
567: 1\,$\lambda$, which on average contains 45\% of the energy of a hadronic
568: shower. The four inner stacks around the beam pipe are of triangle shape.
569: A 1.5\,cm spatial resolution of the lateral shower position is achieved
570: using four photodiodes which detect the wavelength shifted light from each
571: of the scintillator stacks.
572: %The detector is composed of $8\times 8\, {\rm cm}^2$ stacks read out
573: %by wavelength shifter and photodiodes. It has a two-fold segmentation in depth.
574: The electromagnetic energy resolution is
575: $\sigma/E=10\%/\sqrt{E({\rm GeV})}\oplus 1.7\%$.
576: A scintillator hodoscope (TOF) situated behind the BEMC is used to veto
577: proton induced background events based on their early time of arrival
578: compared with nominal $ep$ collision.
579: The new calorimeter SPACAL has both electromagnetic and hadronic sections.
580: The electromagnetic energy resolution is $7.5\%/\sqrt{E({\rm GeV})}\oplus 2.5\%$, and the
581: hadronic section has 2\,$\lambda$ and an integrated timing function to veto
582: proton beam induced background interactions (the old TOF system could thus
583: be removed). The angular region covered is
584: extended (from $153^\circ$ to $177.5^\circ$) compared to the BEMC,
585: and the calorimeter has a very high
586: granularity (1192 cells) yielding a spatial resolution of about 2\,mm.
587:
588: The LAr and BEMC/SPACAL calorimeters are surrounded by the iron return yoke,
589: which is instrumented with 16 layers of limited streamer tubes (LST).
590: Eleven of the 16 layers are equipped with readout electrodes (pads). From
591: ionization energies of particles passing through the chambers the energy of
592: tails of hadronic showers leaking out of the LAr are measured in the analog
593: readout system. Therefore the system is also called tail-catcher (TC).
594: The energy resolution is $\sigma/E\thickapprox 100\%/\sqrt{E({\rm GeV})}$.
595:
596: In the forward direction around the beam pipe, the angular range
597: from 0.3$^\circ$ to 3.3$^\circ$ is covered by the PLUG,
598: a sampling calorimeter consisting of nine copper absorber plates interleaved
599: with eight sensitive layers of large area silicon detectors.
600:
601: \subsection{Muon detectors} \label{sec:muon}
602: %
603: Recognition of muons is very important in the study of heavy quarks, heavy
604: vector mesons, $W$-production and in the search for exotic physics.
605:
606: Muons in the central region are identified by looking for particles
607: penetrating the calorimeter and coil and leaving signals in the TC.
608: Three of the 16 instrumented LST layers are located before the first
609: iron plate, and three after the last iron plate. There is a double layer
610: after four iron plates, and eight single layers in the remaining gaps
611: between the iron sheets. A minimum muon energy of 1.2\,GeV is needed to
612: reach the first LST, while 2\,GeV muons just penetrate the iron.
613:
614: In the very forward direction, a spectrometer composed of drift chambers
615: surrounding a toroidal magnet with a field of 1.6\,Tesla is used to measure
616: muons. This spectrometer measures muons in the momentum range between 5 to
617: 200\,GeV. The lower limit is determined by the amount of material traversed,
618: while beyond the upper limit the muon charge can no longer be measured
619: unambiguously.
620:
621: \subsection{Very forward detectors} \label{sec:fwddet}
622: %
623: H1 has spectrometers downstream of the main detectors in the proton beam
624: direction to measure high energy protons, as well as calorimeters at zero
625: degrees to measure high energy neutrons. These are used in the study of
626: diffractive scattering as well as in the study of leading-particle production.
627:
628: A forward proton spectrometer (FPS) has been installed since 1995 at 81 and
629: 90\,m away from the interaction point, which detects leading protons in the
630: momentum range from 580 to 740\,GeV and scattering angles below 1\,mrad.
631: The FPS has been extended with stations at 80 and
632: 63\,m since 1997. In all stations the protons are detected
633: with scintillating fiber hodoscopes. The detector elements are mounted
634: inside plunger vessels, so called Roman Pots, which are retracted during
635: injection and are brought close to the beam after stable luminosity
636: conditions are reached.
637:
638: The forward neutron calorimeter (FNC) is located at 107\,m downstream of the
639: interaction point. The calorimeter consists of interleaved layers of lead
640: and scintillating fibers. The calorimeter has a total depth of
641: 9.5\,$\lambda$ and has an acceptance $>90\%$ for neutrons with a production
642: angle below 1\,mrad.
643:
644: \subsection{Luminosity detector and electron taggers} \label{sec:lumisyst}
645: %
646: At HERA, the luminosity is determined from the rate of the bremsstrahlung
647: (Bethe-Heitler) process $ep\rightarrow ep\gamma$ (Sec.\ref{sec:rad_proc})
648: using a small luminosity system
649: (the example from H1 is indicated schematically in Fig.\ref{fig:h1det}
650: and shown in a larger view in Fig.\ref{fig:detlumi}).
651: The process has a large and precisely known cross section.
652: \begin{figure}[htb]
653: \begin{center}
654: \begin{picture}(50,110)
655: \put(-167.5,-32.5){\epsfig{file=detlumi.eps,width=50mm,angle=90}}
656: \end{picture}
657: \end{center}
658: \caption{\sl The layout of the H1 luminosity system consisting of an
659: electron tagger (ET=etag) and a photon detector (PD).
660: Note that the $z$ axis coincides with the proton beam direction.}
661: \label{fig:detlumi}
662: \end{figure}
663: In the H1 area, the final state electron, deflected by a set of low-beta
664: quadruples and a bending magnet located in the region
665: $-23.8\,{\rm m}<z<-5.8\,{\rm m}$, passes an exit window at $z=-27.3$\,m and
666: hits the electron tagger (etag) at $z=-33.4$\,m. The etag is located beside
667: the electron beam pipe and is made of 49 crystals covering a total area of
668: $154\times 154$\,mm$^2$. The photon leaves the proton beam pipe through
669: an exit window at $z=-92.3$\,m where the proton beam pipe bends upwards.
670: The photon detector (PD), situated at $z=-102.9$\,m on the $z$ axis, is
671: built out of 25 crystals with a total surface of $100\times 100$\,mm$^2$
672: and a depth of 22 radiation lengths ($X_0$).
673: A $2X_0$ Pb filter followed by a $1X_0$ water
674: \v{C}erenkov veto counter (VC) in front of the PD protects the detector from
675: the high synchrotron radiation flux. The VC eliminates events with photons
676: interacting in the filter. The whole system provides a fast
677: relative luminosity measurement with a statistical precision of about 2\%
678: at nominal beam conditions.
679:
680: The luminosity system serves in addition several other purposes. It provides
681: \begin{itemize}
682: \item electron beam monitoring for the HERA machine,
683: \item absolute luminosity measurement in the interaction
684: region with an accuracy of better than $5\%$,
685: \item tagging of photoproduction events,
686: \item energy measurement for electrons scattered under small angles and
687: \item energy measurement for photons from initial state radiation
688: (Sec.\ref{sec:radc}).
689: \end{itemize}
690:
691: The etag at 33\,m measures electrons in the energy range
692: $0.25E_e<E_e^\prime <0.75E_e$ with an average acceptance of 48\%. The
693: acceptance to higher energy ($0.76E_e<E_e^\prime <0.96E_e$) is covered by a
694: new tagger at 44\,m installed since 1995. The lower energy is covered by
695: yet another tagger at 4\,m.
696:
697: \subsection{Trigger and event reconstruction} \label{sec:trigrec}
698: %
699: The purpose of the trigger system is a fast separation of the interesting
700: physics events from background events. The main background sources, common
701: as those presented to other accelerator experiments, are synchrotron
702: radiation from the electron beam, proton gas interaction in the beam pipe
703: vacuum of about $10^{-9}$\,hPa and stray protons, which produce particle
704: showers by hitting the beam tube and other materials around the accelerator
705: (beam-gas and beam-wall). Beam halo muons and muons from cosmic radiation
706: also contribute. The rate of the background is up to $10^4$ times higher than
707: the rate of a variety of physics processes under study in $ep$ collisions
708: (Table \ref{tab:xs_rates}). The rate of physics processes extends from
709: photoproduction, where the visible $ep$ cross section of
710: several $\mu$b implies an event rate of 20-30\,Hz at design luminosity (see
711: Table \ref{tab:hera_para}), towards $W$ production expected to occur a few
712: times per week.
713: \begin{table}[tbh]
714: \begin{center}
715: \begin{minipage}{12cm}
716: \caption{\sl A comparison of cross sections and/or rates between the main
717: background sources and various physics processes at design luminosity.}
718: \label{tab:xs_rates}
719: \end{minipage}
720: \begin{tabular}{|l|r|r|}
721: \hline
722: Source/process & Cross section & Rate \\\hline
723: Beam-gas(wall) interaction & & 50\,kHz \\
724: Cosmic $\mu$ in barrel & & 700\,Hz \\\hline
725: Tagged $\gamma p$ & 1.6\,$\mu$b & 25\,Hz \\
726: $c\overline{c}$ total & 1\,$\mu$b & 15\,Hz \\
727: DIS low $Q^2$ & 150\,nb & 2.2\,Hz \\
728: DIS high $Q^2$ (e in LAr) & 1.5\,nb & 1.4\,min$^{-1}$ \\
729: Charged current DIS ($p_T>25$\,GeV) & 50\,pb & 3\,h$^{-1}$ \\
730: $W$ production & 0.4\,pb & 0.5\,d$^{-1}$ \\\hline
731: \end{tabular}
732: \end{center}
733: \end{table}
734:
735: The trigger system is based on 4 levels in order to filter the intersting
736: physics events, followed by the offline reconstruction of the kept events.
737:
738: The trigger level 1 (L1) system makes a decision within 2\,$\mu$s on whether to
739: accept or to reject an event using information provided by different
740: subdetectors (``trigger elements (TE)''). The central trigger logic (CTL)
741: combines these trigger elements into 128 ``subtrigger (ST)''. Not all
742: subdetectors can provide this information fast enough to make a decision
743: after each bunch crossing (BC) immediately. Therefore the information is
744: sent into pipelines where it is kept until all relevant subdetectors have
745: provided their trigger elements. The delay of 2\,$\mu$s (24\,BC) is
746: necessary as some subdetectors are relatively slow: the CJC takes 11\,BC
747: due to the longest drift time of 1\,$\mu$s and the LAr takes 13\,BC due to
748: long integration time of the preamplifiers\footnote{The typical drift time
749: of an ionized electron in the LAr gap is about 200\,ns/mm, a gap of 2.35\,mm
750: between two absorber plates results already in about 500\,ns, i.e.\ about
751: 5\,BC.}. If any of the ST conditions is
752: fulfilled by the event, the pipeline is stopped immediately and the signal
753: is passed to the next trigger level\footnote{Some subtriggers are prescaled
754: such that not every event fulfilling the subtrigger conditions is kept.}
755:
756: The level 2 (L2) and level 3 (L3)\footnote{This trigger has not yet been
757: used in H1.} triggers operate during the primary dead
758: time of the readout of about 1.5\,ms. They work on the same data as the L1,
759: and reach a decision within 20\,$\mu$s and 800\,$\mu$s, respectively. While
760: at the L1, only minimum correlation between different subdetectors (e.g.
761: between the MWPC and LAr) is used, the L2 and L3 make full use of the
762: detailed, high granularity trigger data of most subsystems. The L2 system
763: includes a complex topological correlation and a neural network approach.
764:
765: The level 4 (L4) trigger is based on full event reconstruction in MIPS
766: R3000 based processor boards. Algorithms similar to the ones used for the
767: offline analysis are used to select valid events. The events accepted by L4
768: are written to tapes with a rate of about 15\,Hz.
769:
770: The accepted raw data or those simulated Monte Carlo data are then fully
771: reconstructed and assigned into different physics event classes. The data
772: information is written in a compressed format to Data Summary Tapes (DST)
773: which are the basis for physics analyses.
774:
775: %\newpage
776: \section{Monte Carlo technique and detector simulation} \label{sec:simulation}
777: %
778: Monte Carlo (MC) technique has proven to be indispensable for the extraction
779: of physical quantities from the measurements. For the cross section
780: measurement, MC programs can be used to determine corrections for acceptance,
781: efficiencies, background contamination, and resolution effects of
782: the detector system. Some of these corrections can be obtained directly from
783: the data though often with a limited statistical precision.
784: The MC, which provides in principle unlimited event samples,
785: allows therefore to model the data with a better precision.
786: The simulated MC events are also very useful in defining variables and tuning cuts
787: for selecting signal events from various background contributions.
788:
789: More information concerning Monte Carlo generators used in different analyses
790: will be given later together with the analyses.
791: %In the following sections, the commonly used event generators and the
792: %
793: %simulation program by the HERA experiments are briefly described.
794: %\subsection{Monte Carlo generators}
795: %
796: %The NC and CC DIS processes are generated using the programs {\sc
797: %django}\,6.2~\cite{django6.2} and {\sc djangoh}\,1.2~\cite{djangoh1.2}
798: %respectively. The program {\sc heracles}~\cite{heracles} is used to simulate
799: %the effects of electroweak radiation from the electron and quark. {\sc
800: %Heracles} is interfaced with either {\sc ariadne}~\cite{ariadne}, or {\sc
801: %lepto}~\cite{lepto} for the simulation of the hard scattering and the
802: %simulation of the initial and final QCD radiation from the partons. {\sc
803: %Ariadne} is based on the color dipole model~\cite{cdm}, where the struck
804: %quark diaquark system acts as a radiating color antenna. The {\sc lepto}
805: %package produces parton showers according to the {\sc dglap}~\cite{dglap}
806: %(Sec.\ref{sec:qcd}) evolution equation. Perturbative QCD corrections are
807: %implemented by taking into account the full ${\cal O}(\alpha_s)$ or ${\cal
808: %O}(\alpha_s^2)$ matrix elements. The program {\sc jetset}~\cite{jetset} is
809: %then used for the fragmentation of the resulting partons into hadrons, and
810: %for their decay. {\sc Jetset} is based on the Lund string model of
811: %fragmentation~\cite{lund}.
812: %
813: %The DIS cross sections are generated using the {\sc mrsh} parton
814: %distributions~\cite{mrsh} and setting $F_L=0$. A reweighting procedure is
815: %applied using the H1 QCD fit to the positron data~\cite{h1hiq9497}. It should
816: %be pointed, however, that the cross section measurement is independent of
817: %the input to the MC generators (Sec.\ref{sec:xsection}).
818: %
819: %Other $ep$ processes considered are:
820: %\begin{description}
821: %\item [Photoproduction ($\gamma p$) events] represent an important
822: %background source in the NC and CC analyses. They are
823: %generated with the {\sc pythia} program~\cite{pythia} using the {\sc grv
824: %lo}~\cite{grvlo} parton densities for the proton and photon respectively.
825: %\item [Elastic QED Compton events] only contribute in the NC analysis. They
826: %are generated using the program {\sc compton}~\cite{compton}.
827: %\item [Photon-photon ($\gamma\gamma$) interactions] contribute in the NC
828: %analysis when the final state is an $e^+e^-$ pair and in the CC analysis
829: %when the final state is a $\mu^+\mu^-$ pair. They are generated with {\sc
830: %lpair}~\cite{lpair}.
831: %\item [Production of $W$ and $Z$] has a small cross section (Table
832: %\ref{tab:xs_rates}). The scattered electron is usually not detected. On the
833: %other hand, if the boson decays leptonically it may be misidentified as an
834: %NC or CC events. These processes are generated with {\sc epvec}~\cite{epvec}.
835: %\end{description}
836: %
837: %\subsection{Detector simulation}
838: %
839: Once an event (either a signal or a background event) is generated,
840: the H1 detector response to the particles generated in the event is simulated
841: in detail using the H1 simulation package, {\sc h{\small 1}sim},
842: which makes use of
843: the {\sc geant} program~\cite{geant}. The parameters used by this program
844: were determined in test beam measurements and optimized during $ep$ data
845: taking. For the simulation of the energy response of the calorimeter a fast
846: parametrization is used for the development of electromagnetic and hadronic
847: showers to save computing time. These simulated events are then subject to
848: the same reconstruction program (Sec.\ref{sec:trigrec}) as the data and
849: the same analysis chain.
850:
851: \newpage
852: \section{Kinematics reconstruction and coverage}
853: %
854: \subsection{Reconstruction of kinematic variables} \label{sec:kinerec}
855: %
856: For NC events, the kinematics is over-constrained as the
857: HERA experiments measure both the scattered electron and the hadronic
858: final state. Here are a few commonly used methods:
859: \begin{description}
860: \item [Electron method] uses the energy, $E_e^\prime$, and the polar
861: angle, $\theta_e$, of the scattered electron measured relative to
862: the proton beam direction:
863: \begin{eqnarray}
864: & & Q^2_e=4E_eE_e^\prime\cos^2\left(\frac{\theta_e}{2}\right)
865: \label{eq:q2e} \\
866: & & y_e=1-\frac{E_e^\prime}{E_e}\sin^2\left(\frac{\theta_e}{2}\right)
867: \label{eq:ye} \\
868: & & x_e=\frac{Q^2_e}{sy_e} \label{eq:xe} \,.
869: \end{eqnarray}
870: Since the incident beam energy $E_e$ appears both in $Q^2_e$ and in $y_e$,
871: this method is thus sensitive to the initial state radiation (the effective
872: beam energy after radiation is smaller than $E_e$, see Sec.\ref{sec:radc},
873: and Eq.(\ref{eq:eb_eff}) in Sec.\ref{sec:isr}).
874: \item [Double angle (DA) method~\cite{kineda}] uses the electron polar angle,
875: $\theta_e$, and the inclusive hadronic polar angle, $\theta_h$,
876: which is the polar angle of the scattered quark in the QPM (Sec.\ref{sec:qpm})
877: with massless quarks
878: \begin{eqnarray}
879: & & Q^2_{\rm DA}=\frac{E_e}{E_p}\frac{s}{\alpha_e(\alpha_e+\alpha_h)}\,,
880: \label{eq:q2da} \\
881: & & y_{\rm DA}=\frac{\alpha_h}{\alpha_e+\alpha_h}\,, \\
882: & & x_{\rm DA}=\frac{Q^2_{\rm DA}}{sy_{\rm DA}}\,,
883: \end{eqnarray}
884: with
885: \begin{eqnarray}
886: & \displaystyle \alpha_e\equiv \tan\!\left(\frac{\theta_e}{2}\right)=\frac{\Sigma_e}{p_{T,e}}\,, &
887: \alpha_h\equiv
888: \tan\!\left(\frac{\theta_h}{2}\right)=\frac{\Sigma_h}{p_{T,h}}
889: \label{eq:alpha_eh}\\
890: & \displaystyle \Sigma_e\equiv E_e^\prime-p_{z,e}\,, &
891: p_{T,e}\equiv E_e^\prime\sin\theta_e \label{eq:epzpt_e} \\
892: & \displaystyle \Sigma_h\equiv \sum_i E_i-p_{z,i}\,, &
893: p_{T,h}\equiv \sqrt{(\sum_i p_{x,i})^2+(\sum_i p_{y,i})^2}\label{eq:epzpt_h}
894: %& & \alpha_e\equiv \tan\!\left(\frac{\theta_e}{2}\right)=\frac{\Sigma_e}{p_{T,e}}\,,
895: %\hspace{3mm} \begin{array}[t]{l} \Sigma_e\equiv \displaystyle E_e^\prime-p_{z,e}\\
896: %p_{T,e}\equiv \displaystyle E_e^\prime\sin\theta_e \end{array} \\
897: %& & \alpha_h\equiv \tan\!\left(\frac{\theta_h}{2}\right)=\frac{\Sigma_h}{p_{T,h}}\,,
898: %\hspace{3mm} \begin{array}[t]{l} \Sigma_h\equiv \displaystyle \sum_i E_i-p_{z,i} \\
899: %p_{T,h}\equiv \displaystyle \sqrt{(\sum_i p_{x,i})^2+(\sum_i p_{y,i})^2} \end{array}
900: \end{eqnarray}
901: where the summations are over all particles of the hadronic final state.
902: The DA method is also sensitive to photon emission of the primary electron.
903: On the other hand, it is, to
904: a good approximation, insensitive to the energy scale uncertainties. It has
905: thus been widely used in various analyses to check and improve the energy
906: scales of the scattered electron and of the hadronic system.
907: \item[Sigma ($\Sigma$) method~\cite{kinesigma}] is constructed such that no
908: electron beam energy $E_e$ is used directly in $Q^2$ and $y$:
909: \begin{eqnarray}
910: & &
911: Q^2_\Sigma=\frac{E^{\prime 2}_e\sin^2\theta_e}{1-y_\Sigma}\,,\label{eq:q2s}\\
912: & & y_\Sigma=\frac{\Sigma_h}{\Sigma_e+\Sigma_h}\,,\label{eq:ys}\\
913: & & x_\Sigma=\frac{Q^2_\Sigma}{sy_\Sigma}\,.\label{eq:xs}
914: \end{eqnarray}
915: This method is thus less sensitive to the radiative effects.
916: \end{description}
917: The fact that different methods can be used to reconstruct the event kinematics
918: has two consequences:
919: %compared to those operated in the fixed-target mode:
920: \begin{itemize}
921: \item The kinematic domain is fully explored; for example the electron method is
922: good at high $y$ while the $\Sigma$ method can be used at sufficiently low $y$.
923: \item Important cross-checks of systematic effects are possible between
924: different methods.
925: \end{itemize}
926:
927: For a CC event, however, the kinematics can only be reconstructed from the
928: hadronic final state:
929: \begin{eqnarray}
930: & & Q^2_h=\frac{E^2_{T,h}}{1-y_h}\,,\\
931: & & y_h=\frac{\Sigma_h}{2E_e}\,,\label{eq:yh} \\
932: & & x_h=\frac{Q^2_h}{sy_h}\,.
933: \end{eqnarray}
934: The understanding of the hadronic energy scale and its scale uncertainty is
935: thus crucial for all CC measurements.
936:
937: \subsection{Coverage of the kinematic phase space}
938: %
939: The HERA measurements in DIS cover a vast kinematic range as shown in \
940: Fig.\ref{fig:kine_xq2}. The HERA measurements extend those of fixed-target
941: experiments by more than 2 orders of magnitudes in both $x$ and $Q^2$.
942: \begin{figure}[htb]
943: \begin{center}
944: \begin{picture}(50,370)
945: \put(-190,-20){\epsfig{file=kine_xq2.eps,width=150mm}}
946: \end{picture}
947: \end{center}
948: \caption{\sl Coverage in the kinematic plane $x-Q^2$ of the HERA experiments,
949: H1 and ZEUS, compared with that of the fixed-target experiments from
950: BCDMS~\cite{bcdms}, NMC~\cite{nmc97}, E665~\cite{e665}, and
951: SLAC~\cite{slac92}. The corresponding scale $(\lambda)$ probed by a virtual
952: boson is also indicated. The points indicate the location where
953: cross sections or structure functions have been measured.}
954: \label{fig:kine_xq2}
955: \end{figure}
956: At the highest values of $Q^2$, the measurements are still statistically
957: limited (Chapter \ref{chap:hiq2}).
958: The measurements for $Q^2\lesssim 4$\,GeV$^2$
959: have been made possible by using different techniques and by upgrading
960: experimental apparatus:
961: \begin{itemize}
962: \item Using data in which the interaction point is shifted from its nominal
963: position to the forward direction by $\sim 70$\,cm (so-called shifted vertex
964: events). For the same backward calorimeter, the
965: angular acceptance is increased when the interaction vertex is moved away
966: from the nominal interaction point.
967: \item Using data with hard initial state radiation. A large fraction ($\sim
968: 30\%$) of the photons from events with hard initial state radiation are
969: measured in the photon calorimeters of the luminosity system
970: (Sec.\ref{sec:lumisyst}). The resultant $ep$ collisions therefore occur at
971: lower center-of-mass energies, and lower $Q^2$ and higher $x$ values can be
972: attained. As an example, the H1 analysis is shown in some detail
973: in Sec.\ref{sec:isr} to illustrate how the measurement is realized
974: in an extended kinematic region.
975: \item Upgraded apparatus. The angular acceptance of the scattered electron
976: has been significantly extended in the shutdown period 1994-95 by replacing
977: the old backward calorimeter and proportional chamber, BEMC and BPC, with the
978: new calorimeter and drift chamber, SPACAL and BDC (Sec.\ref{sec:h1det}).
979: The ZEUS experiment has added a small angle electron calorimeter,
980: the beam pipe calorimeter, in the same shutdown period.
981: \end{itemize}
982: