CDF GP Review - CHAMPs - PRL
[Guideline (PW protected)]
Authors: Rick Snider, Tom Phillips

Internal Page (PW protected)

E-mail to authors, GPs, or authors & GPs
  • 081126 New version of PRL to GPs 
      Teruki   ... Oct 29
  Matthew  ...
  Oliver   ...
    See internal link for more information.
  • 081017 Comments for CHAMP PRL draft version 1 are received from: 
      Berkeley   ... Oct 15 (*)
  IPP-Canada ... Oct 16
  UC Davis   ... Oct 17 (*)
  SPRG       ... Oct 18
  UIUC       ... Oct 20 (*)
  Helsinki   ... Oct 27 (*)
  • 081003 CHAMP PRL, posted for first reading!!! (Comments, due 5 pm, October 17)
    Four reading institutions, contacted (10/03). Relevant links:
  • 081003 PRL v5.0, signed off by GPs → First Reading!!!

  • 080927 PRL v5.0 to GPs → minor update, 9/28; another update, 9/30 
    TK      ... signed off ( 9/27)
Matthew ... signed off (10/03)
Oliver  ... signed off ( 9/30)
  • 080925 Reminder of the PRL draft to authors.
  • 080920 TK also agreed with Matthew's assessment and his proposed change in the PRL draft paper.
  • 080916 Rick will look for the reference for pT resolution: [???%]*pT

  • 080915 Oliver agreed with Matthew's conclusion and pointed out that the σ(W/Z) paper used a resolution of 0.17%, suggesting that the authors check a suitable reference. 
    COT resolution references (by Oliver, Sep. 20)
 M(W) - Phys. Rev. D77, 112001 (2008)
    δ(pT, beam constraint)/pT2=0.0005 (states, it is 3x better than non beam constraint)
 σ(W/Z) - J. Phys. G34, 2457 (2007)
    δ(pT)/pT2=0.0017
 σ(J/Psi) - Phys. Rev. D71, 032001 (2005)  
    δ(pT)/pT2=0.0017

  • 080915 Matthew's report - CDF 9512 is a study of δβ/β using anti-protons. The results are: 
    momentum      β        D(cm)   δT(ns)   δβ    δβ/β
(GeV/c)
0.3-0.4   0.30-0.39   201-158  0.375   0.007  0.021
0.4-0.5   0.39-0.47   158-150  0.248   0.009  0.021
0.5-0.6   0.47-0.54   150-146  0.196   0.010  0.020
0.6-0.7   0.54-0.60   146-144  0.164   0.011  0.019
0.7-0.8   0.60-0.65   144-143  0.158   0.013  0.020
    So, this shows that the uncertainty in β is **not** independent of momentum, as stated in the text. However, the fractional uncertainty is essentially independent of momentum: (δβ/β) is always about 2%.

    The contribution to the uncertainty in the mass is then 2%*(γ*β)2 which will generally reduce this further, leaving the momentum uncertainty dominating when δp/p is greater than about 2%. Since δpT/pT is abount 0.3%*pT, this happens at around pT>10 GeV and so it applies to the signal and the control region tracks.

  • 080911 (7:53 pm central) The authors released CDF note 9512 and a new version of PRL (version 4.0). GPs are reviewing. 
    Matthew (Friday, Sep 12, 2008 5:35 AM)- I'll try to get back to you by early next week.
Oliver (Friday, Sep 12, 2008 9:10 AM) - Same here. I'll read it over the weekend.
Teruki - I am stuck because of Ike. I still cannot buy the tickets back to Texas...

  • 080906 The authors have written a CDF note addressing the question of TOF resolution as a function of velocity. The bottom line is that our TOF mass resolution is completely dominated by the momentum resolution, so even though the TOF resolution for slow antiprotons is not constant with velocity and we do not model this properly, there is no effect on the analysis. They should be able to post the note Monday or Tuesday.

    The draft has also been updated to reflect the latest GP comments, and should be available as well.

  • 080828
    D0 results, featured at Fermilab Today

  • 080804 Tom - implementing Matthew's comments (he was on vacation last week.); Rick - running a job to make the resolution plots for pbars and results in a few days.
  • 080731 TK message to Authors on timeline for the 1st reading by CDF
    ... Considering various situations (= everybody is busy for various reasons), let's make the case for 1st reading to the collaboration in 1-2 weeks.
    1. Implement Matthew's comments ASAP.
    2. All GPs will go through the NEW version one more time (quickly) to check if there are any major mistakes.
    3. Provide the plot on the resolution vs beta result?
    4. If all GPs are happy with the new version and the plot from #3 solidfies the quality of the analysis (no surprise = no unexpected result), we submit the draft to CDF.
  • 080728 Comments by Matthew Jones (literary) → Authors
  • 080716 UPDATE
    ... (a) PRL v3.5, being reviewed by Matthew Jones (literary). His comments, by the end of the next week (July 25 or 26).
    ... (b) GPs are waiting for a KEY plot from Rick
  • 080701 PRL v3.5 to GPs .. waiting for a plot from Rick and comments from Matthew Jones (literary)
  • 080627 Rick is on vacation between June 27 through July 7.
  • 080627 Oliver's comments on PRL v3
  • 080626 Teruki's comments on PRL v3

  • 080626 GP Meeting #5 at 10 AM (85CHAMPS or 85-242677)
    ... Rick and Matthew (cell# 630-309-8187) at Fermilab; Tom at Duke; Oliver at TRIUMF; Teruki at TAMU

    We followed the May 13 GP meeting minutes.

    1. [Item 1] All of us will make sure that the readers can find all numbers for testing their own model(s).
    2. [Item 2] Fig. 2 is ready! The authors simply read the intersection of two bands to set a conservative mass limit. Please check with the SUSY conveners if this is a standard way to set the mass limit.
    3. [Item 3] We still think it is really good to have additional figure to show the detector performance on the resolution for low β region. But we don't see the room for this PRL. We agree that:
      • the plot should be prepared for our internal review purpose,
      • the issue on the detector performance is clearly addressed in the text w/o that plot.

      Note: Rick is on vacation in Weeks of June 30. Thus, the plot will be ready some time in Week of July 7.
    4. [Item 4] GPs will send their comments on v3 to authors by this weekend. Tom will implement them before July 3rd.

  • 080614 TK was out of country (6/14 ~ 6/22).
  • 080612 PRL v3 to GPs

  • 080529 GP Meeting #5 --- May 29 or 30? → we couldn't meet :-<
  • 080513 GP Meeting #4 (85CHAMPS or 85-242677), Trailer 163-G, 9 a.m.-10:00 a.m., Tuesday, May 13)
    → Tom at Duke, Rick at Fermilab, Oliver on vacation (cell: 630 440 4426), Matthew at Purdue; Teruki at TAMU
    Minutes:
    1. Make sure the text is written as a model-independent search. In other words, people outside CDF can set limits on own models based on a complete information on the event acceptance and trigger efficiency for CHAMP tracks in specified geometical and kinematical cuts. For example, "We therefore assume a flat efficiency for β > 0.4 and zero for β < 0.4." → "We therefore require β > 0.4, where the efficiency for CHAMP tracks are flat at ???%" (Line 26, left, p.3 or Matthew's comment #36)
      ==> in progress
    2. Add theory-uncertainty band on Fig. 2
      ==> in progress
    3. β
      • Make sure we have a clear description on δβ/β using W→eν and explain that δβ/β is independent β
      • Make sure δβ/β is correct for 0.4 < β < 0.9, which is obtained by W→eν
      • Is the resolution on β taken into account when setting limits?
      • Do we need a calibration plot? (i) track momentum resolution vs pT and (ii) β resolution vs pT. (Oliver's comment) If YES, we need to shorten the text for this new plot.

      ==> Authors and GPs discussed three options:
      (i) Using antiproton sample, make a NEW calibration plot for low β region (Oliver)
      (ii) Prepare a plot for "Efficiency vs. pT" for various CHAMP masses (Matthew)
      (iii) Add 140-GeV stop curve on Fig. 1 (Teruki)
      (iv) We don't need such a plot, but make sure the text is clear.
    4. Meantime, authors will implement GPs' comments and have Version 3 on May 20.

  • 080513 Teruki's comments on PRL v2 to authors [here]
  • 080512 Matthew's comments on PRL v2 to authors [here] and [notes]
  • 080509 Oliver's comments on PRL v2 to authors [here]
  • 080421 PRL v2 to GPs
  • 080417 GP Meeting #3 (85CHAMPS or 85-242677), Trailer 163-G, 2:15 p.m.-3:00 p.m., Thursday, April 17)
    → [minutes] (not ready) δβ/β

  • 080414 Matthew's comments on 1st draft

  • 080410 GP Meeting #2 (85CHAMPS or 85-242677), Trailer 163-G, 2:00 p.m.-3:00 p.m., Thursday, April 10)
    → Tom, Rick, and Oliver at Fermilab; Matt at Purdue; Teruki at TAMU
    → minutes

  • 080401 Oliver's comments on 1st draft
  • 080329 TK's comments on 1st draft

  • 080327 "Kick-off" CHAMPS Godparent Meeting
    (*) 3 PM, Thursday, March 27
    (*) Trailer 163-G, 3:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m
    Connection : call 85CHAMPS (85-242677)
    If you don't have a video connection, you can still join:
    (a) dial 1-510-883-7860
    (b) wait for a announcement, and then type 85242677#
    (c) you should be connected now.
    Tom, Chris, Ben, Jaco, and Oliver at Fermilab
    Matt at Purdue; Teruki at TAMU; Rick at "home"
    Jaco - "kick-off" statement

    ALL - The physics-relation Q&A's will be posted on the internal web site. But we agreed on a few key issues:

    • The publication journal is PRL. Since D0's abstract on CHAMPs at the APS meeting is based on 1.1 fb-1, an expedite review is essential.
    • Biweekly meeting

    The first meeting of the Godparent Committee will be the "kick-off" meeting with the authors, Exotics Conveners and the Spokespeople. The kick-off meeting should be held right after the final results are blessed by the physics group. The purpose of this meeting is:

    1. Review the guidelines for godparenting process
    2. Make sure everyone agrees on what analysis and results are going to be in the paper
    3. Iron out any disagreement or misunderstanding at this early stage
    4. Agree on a tentative time scale for paper submission
    The Committee chair is in charge of organizing this meeting (and all the following ones). We urge authors and godparents to carefully review and follow the guidelines for godparent committees and for the CDF publication process. They are posted here: http://www-cdf.fnal.gov/internal/physics/godparents/guidelines.html You will find the checklist from this page. Please follow that.
  • 080227 GPs are appointed:
    GPs are:
    • Teruki Kamon (chair) - TAMU
    • Matthew Jones (literary) - Purdue
    • Oliver Stelzer Chilton - Oxford
    1. The relevent documentation is 8497
    2. The reading institutions for this analysis are
    3. Journal = PRL