MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

48
MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of W.C. Chang 11/12/2005 LEPS Collaboration Meeting in Taiwan

description

MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of . W.C. Chang 11/12/2005 LEPS Collaboration Meeting in Taiwan. Photo-Production of  Mesons at Forward Region (small |t|). Pomeron: Positive power-law scaling of s. Dominating at large energy. Natural parity (=+ 1) . - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Page 1: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

MC Check of Analysis Frameworkand Decay Asymmetry of

W.C. Chang11/12/2005

LEPS Collaboration Meeting in Taiwan

Page 2: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Photo-Production of Mesonsat Forward Region (small |t|)

• Pomeron: – Positive power-law scaling of s.– Dominating at large energy.– Natural parity (=+1). – Exchange particles unknown; like

ly to be glueball : P1(J=2+), P2 (J=0+, negative power-law scaling of s, Ref: T. Nakano and H.Toki, 1998)

• Pseudo-scalar particle: – Negative power-law scaling of s.– Showing up at small energy.– Un-natural parity (= –1).– Exchange particles like ,.– OZI suppressed.

Page 3: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

World data near threshold

Solid curve : A model with Pomeron + Pseudo scalar exchange (A. Titov et. al, PRC 67 (2003), 065205)

A local maximum seen in ds/dt (t=tmin) near Eg=2 GeV.Smaller t slope near threshold. A simple extrapolation from high Eg by Regge model gives b ~5 GeV2

min||exp|| min

ttbttdt

ddtd

What causes this structure?Could be due to:

•Pseudo-scalar exchange?•0+ glueball trajectory?

Utilize the extra scrutiny power of polarization observables.

Page 4: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Peak and Off Peak

Peak Off Peak

Page 5: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Decay angular distributionsCurves: fit to the data.

•W sin∝ 2 helicity-conserving processes are dominating.•Positive 11-1natural parity exchanges are dominating.•Energy independence 11-1 N/UN ~const.

Forward angles; -0.2 < t+|t|min <0. GeV2

11-1=0.197 ±0.030

11-1=0.189 ±0.024

Peak

Off Peak

Page 6: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Peak and Off Peak

Consistent with the scenario:• not due to unnatural-parity processes ONLY.• possible presence of additional natural parity exchange signature of 0+ glueball trajectory??

Page 7: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Coherent Photoproduction from Deuteron

• Large radius of deuteron leads to fast deceasing form factor. A steeper exponential slope in t distribution.

• In scattering amplitude, the unnatural-parity iso-vector exchange is completely eliminated due to Tn

= Tp. Dec

ay asymmetry gets closer to +1.• The -meson exchange is about one o

rder smaller than that of -exchange in pp. Positive-parity components are expected to dominate in a significant way. Decay asymmetry gets very close to +1.

• Energy dependence of cross section. Deviation from that of Pomeron exchange will signal the other component(s) with positive-parity exchange.

//

//Titov et al., PRC 66, 022202 (2002)

Page 8: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Isospin Effect in Decay Asymmetry of Quasi-free Photoproduction from NucleonsDue to isospin factor 3:• gpp and gpp are of the same

sign: constructive interference between -exchange and -exchange.

• gnn (= gpp )and gnn (=gpp ) are of opposite sign: destructive interference between -exchange and -exchange.

• Value of decay symmetry gets closer to +1 in nn, compared with pp.

Titov et al., PRC 59, R2993 (1999)

Page 9: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of
Page 10: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

One-dimensional Angular Distribution

= /2, in Horie-san’s convention

Page 11: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Decay Asymmetry and Asymmetry of natural-parity and unnatural-parity exchange

Decay Asymmetry

Parity Asymmetry

Page 12: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Method• Cross Section

– Standard technique as SLH2. Acceptance function is evaluated by MC events.

– The separation of coherent and incoherent components is done by the fit of MMd distribution.

• Decay Asymmetry– 1d fit: standard technique as SLH2. Acceptance function is evaluated by

MC events. – Maximum likelihood fit: 9 ijk’s can be determined simultaneously.– Contributions from coherent and incoherent components are disentangle

d by the measurements with different MMd cuts, i.e. different relative percentage of mixture of these two components in the event samples under the assumption of linear contribution.

Page 13: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

MMd(,KK) of LH2

Page 14: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

MMd(,KK) of LD2

Page 15: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Coherent vs IncoherentProton vs Neutron• Determine of relative ratios of coherent component to

incoherent one by fitting MMd spectra with MC simulation.

• In LD2 data, disentangle decay asymmetry of coherent interaction and incoherent one as functions of Egamma and t.

• By the decay asymmetry results from LH2 and coherent part of LD2, disentangle decay asymmetry of interactions with protons and neutrons.

Page 16: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

MC LD2 event sample

• Coherent events:– Exponential t-slope: 15– All rho’s=0 except rho(1,1-1)=0.5, Im rho(2,1-1)=-

0.5. • Incoherent events:

– Exponential t-slope: 3– All rho’s=0 except rho(1,1-1)=0.2, Im rho(2,1-1)=-

0.2.

Page 17: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

MC: Coherent in LD2 (OFFSHELL=ON, t bin=20 MeV, (E)=10 MeV)

Page 18: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

MC: Incoherent in LD2

Page 19: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

MC: 1-d angular distribution

Page 20: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

MC: Asymmetry from 1d distribution

Page 21: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

[Coherent/Total] versus MMd Cut

Page 22: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

MC: 3 w/o and with different MMd cuts; 3 of coherent and incoherent components

Page 23: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

MC: 3 w/o and with different MMd cuts; 3 of coherent and incoherent components

Page 24: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Maximum Likelihood Fit

Page 25: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of
Page 26: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

MC: from ML Fit

Page 27: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

MC: 3 w/o and with different MMd cuts

Page 28: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

MC: 3 of coherent and incoherent components

Page 29: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Coherent Components in LD2 (OFFSHELL=ON, t bin=20 MeV, (E)=10 MeV)

Page 30: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Incoherent Components in LD2

Page 31: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

LH2

Page 32: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Energy dependence of t-slope

:LD2 coherent:LD2 incoherent:LH2

Page 33: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Energy dependence of normalized intercept

:LD2 coherent:LD2 incoherent:LH2

Page 34: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

1-d angular distribution

Page 35: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

LD2: Asymmetry from 1d distribution

Page 36: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

LH2: Asymmetry from 1d distribution

Page 37: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Asymmetry from 1d distribution:LD2 vs LH2

Page 38: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

LD2 Data: 3 w/o and with different MMd cuts; 3 of coherent and incoherent components

Page 39: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

LD2 Data: 3 w/o and with different MMd cuts; 3 of coherent and incoherent components

Page 40: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

LD2: from ML Fit

Page 41: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

LH2: from ML Fit

Page 42: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

from ML Fit : LD2 vs LH2

Page 43: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

LD2: 3 w/o and with different MMd cuts

Page 44: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

LD2: 3 of coherent and incoherent components

Page 45: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Consistency of Analysis Results

Black: HorieRed: Chang, 1dBlue: Chang, ML

Page 46: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Estimate of Systematic Errors from MC trails

Page 47: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Estimate of Systematic Errors from MC trails

Page 48: MC Check of Analysis Framework and Decay Asymmetry of

Summary

• Large exponential slope about 15 and strong energy dependence of intercept at t=tmin are observed for the coherent production off LD2. The energy dependence of intercept for coherent LD2 events is distinctively different from those of LH2 and LD2 incoherent events.

• Large decay asymmetry around the value of +1 is disentangled for coherent LD2 interaction. Consistent with theoretical prediction based on the absence of unnatural-parity -exchange and small contribution of η-exchange..

• Estimation of systematic errors by MC trials will be done.