Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

Measurement of the forward–backward asymmetry of top-quark and antiquark pairs using the full CDF Run II data set

T. Aaltonen et al. (CDF Collaboration)
Phys. Rev. D 93, 112005 – Published 3 June 2016

Abstract

We measure the forward–backward asymmetry of the production of top-quark and antiquark pairs in proton-antiproton collisions at center-of-mass energy s=1.96TeV using the full data set collected by the Collider Detector at Fermilab (CDF) in Tevatron Run II corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 9.1fb1. The asymmetry is characterized by the rapidity difference between top quarks and antiquarks (Δy) and measured in the final state with two charged leptons (electrons and muons). The inclusive asymmetry, corrected to the entire phase space at parton level, is measured to be AFBtt¯=0.12±0.13, consistent with the expectations from the standard model (SM) and previous CDF results in the final state with a single charged lepton. The combination of the CDF measurements of the inclusive AFBtt¯ in both final states yields AFBtt¯=0.160±0.045, which is consistent with the SM predictions. We also measure the differential asymmetry as a function of Δy. A linear fit to AFBtt¯(|Δy|), assuming zero asymmetry at Δy=0, yields a slope of α=0.14±0.15, consistent with the SM prediction and the previous CDF determination in the final state with a single charged lepton. The combined slope of AFBtt¯(|Δy|) in the two final states is α=0.227±0.057, which is 2.0σ larger than the SM prediction.

  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
7 More
  • Received 1 March 2016

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.93.112005

© 2016 American Physical Society

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

  1. Physical Systems
Particles & Fields

Authors & Affiliations

Click to Expand

Article Text (Subscription Required)

Click to Expand

References (Subscription Required)

Click to Expand
Issue

Vol. 93, Iss. 11 — 1 June 2016

Reuse & Permissions
Access Options
CHORUS

Article Available via CHORUS

Download Accepted Manuscript
Author publication services for translation and copyediting assistance advertisement

Authorization Required


×

Images

  • Figure 1
    Figure 1

    Posterior-probability density of δj for one of the two jets (a) and Δy (b) for one example event from the powheg MC sample of tt¯ events. Based on the generator-level information, the left panels refer to the correct lepton-jet pairing, and the right panels refer to the incorrect pairing. The red vertical arrows show the true values of the parameters.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 2
    Figure 2

    Expected uncertainties as functions of the four optimization parameters, Θ(δj) (a), wQ (b), Θ(mlb2) (c), and Θ(ΔRmin) (d). In each plot is shown the statistical uncertainty for signal only (dash-dotted line), statistical uncertainty for signal and backgrounds (total statistical uncertainty, dashed line), and the quadrature sum of the total statistical uncertainty and the background systematic uncertainty (solid line). The optimal values are based on the minimum point of the green solid line, as marked with the vertical arrows on the plots, and summarized in Table 1. For each plot, all other optimization parameters are held at their optimal values.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 3
    Figure 3

    Distributions of pT,tt¯ (a), pz,tt¯ (b), mtt¯ (c), and Δy (d) from data compared with the SM expectations.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 4
    Figure 4

    Distribution of the difference between reconstructed and generated values for Δy from events in the nominal powheg tt¯ MC after all the event-selection criteria. Each event contributes a probability distribution with a unity weight.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 5
    Figure 5

    Detector smearing matrix estimated with the nominal powheg tt¯ MC sample.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 6
    Figure 6

    Efficiencies in the four bins, approximated to linear functions of the AFBtt¯, estimated with the reweighted powheg MC samples.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 7
    Figure 7

    Comparison of the AFBtt¯ values observed in the reweighted powheg MC samples and the AFBtt¯ values generated. The dashed line shows where the measured and generated values are equal. No bias is observed.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 8
    Figure 8

    Same as Fig. 7 but with a number of predicted values for AFBtt¯ from LO SM calculations and a few benchmark BSM scenarios. The description of the BSM scenarios is in the main text.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 9
    Figure 9

    Same as Fig. 7 but for the AFBtt¯(|Δy|<0.5) (a) and AFBtt¯(|Δy|>0.5) (b) measurements. The uncertainties correspond to the size of the powheg MC sample, which is over a factor of 100 larger than the data, and the measured values are always within 1σ of the generated values. (Note the different vertical scales in the two subfigures.)

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 10
    Figure 10

    Posterior-probability density for the measurement of the inclusive AFBtt¯. A Gaussian function is fitted to the core of the distribution to extract the result. The NNLO SM prediction is 0.095±0.007.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 11
    Figure 11

    A comparison of all inclusive top-quark-pair forward–backward asymmetry results from the Tevatron with the NLO and NNLO SM predictions.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 12
    Figure 12

    Two-dimensional posterior-probability-density distribution of AFBtt¯(|Δy|>0.5) vs. AFBtt¯(|Δy|<0.5).

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 13
    Figure 13

    Comparison of the AFBtt¯ vs |Δy| dilepton results with the NNLO SM prediction [8]. The data points are displayed at the bin centroids predicted by the powheg MC sample. The linear fit with zero intercept yields a slope of 0.14±0.15.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 14
    Figure 14

    Comparison of the combined inclusive AFBtt¯ and the slope α of AFBtt¯ vs |Δy| with all other Tevatron measurements and the NNLO SM calculations.

    Reuse & Permissions
×

Sign up to receive regular email alerts from Physical Review D

Log In

Cancel
×

Search


Article Lookup

Paste a citation or DOI

Enter a citation
×