Follow @syymmetries
Showing posts with label AMS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AMS. Show all posts

Saturday, 5 September 2015

Friday wrap-up: ATLAS+CMS Higgs combination, THE rankings...

Wherein I list some (mostly) recent happenings, ramble a bit, and provide links, in an order roughly determined by importance and relevance to particle physics. Views are my own. Content very definitely skewed by my own leanings and by papers getting coverage, and it may not even be correct. It is a blog after all...

  • Conferences of interest this week include The 3rd Annual Large Hadron Collider Physics Conference (LHCP2015; indico; twitter), and QCD@LHC 2015 (indico).
  • At LHCP, Marco Pieri presented the brand new ATLAS+CMS Higgs combination (talk here [pdf]). Slides 17 and 18 tell the story for the SM Higgs versus the null:


    The interesting things for me are: global signal strength fit is $\mu=1.09^{+0.11}_{-0.10}$, H→ττ and VBF production are (preliminarily) "discovered" at >5σ, and ttH has a mild (2.3σ) excess (already hinted at Moriond) to keep an eye on. Different parameterisations are also studied, finding, of course, everything consistent with a SM Higgs. Would imagine we can look forward to the arXiv paper soon.
  • The Times Higher Education World University Rankings have decided to exclude from their analysis all papers with more than 1000 authors for the 2015-16 rankings. This obviously has a big impact on those involved in the ATLAS/CMS collaborations. Interesting to read the comments below the post from John Ellis, James Stirling, and Andrew Hamilton, among others.
  • According to this nature news article, there are some concerns for the cooling pumps in the AMS-02 experiment. There were originally four cooling pumps. They write: "Only one pump is needed at any given time. One failed in February 2014 and at least one of the other three is showing possible signs of trouble." Also: "[Ting] exhibited little patience for questions about the cooling pumps. 'We have four pumps — we only need one,' he says. 'We expect to operate for the lifetime of the space station.'"
  • Some movement on the Hawking/Perry/Strominger proposal for the black hole information loss problem. There's now a short stake-claiming arXiv paper, and an hour-long talk from Malcolm Perry on YouTube. Sabine Hossenfelder reacts here.
  • From CERN: a summary on LHC Run 2 so far from Rolf Heuer (he comments on the CMS magnet: "... it’s clear that there are contaminants in the cold box that supplies the magnet with liquid helium, and this will therefore need a thorough clean.... All being well, CMS will be able to take data satisfactorily with field on until the end of the 2015 physics programme, postponing the cleaning operation until the winter stop in order to be ready for the start of 2016."), and a summary on recent scrubbing runs.
  • In video/audio media:
  • Lastly, here is an antineutrino global map: an experimentally informed model of Earth’s surface antineutrino flux over the 0 to 11 MeV energy spectrum.

Friday, 1 May 2015

Friday wrap-up: DM self-interactions, on-Z excess, AMS...

Wherein I list some (mostly) recent happenings, ramble a bit, and provide links, in an order roughly determined by importance and relevance to particle physics. Views are my own. Content very definitely skewed by my own leanings and by papers getting coverage, and it may not even be correct. It is a blog after all...

  • This arXiv preprint answers my hanging question from a couple of weeks ago as to how the recent Abell 3827 (four-)galaxy cluster measurement is $10^4$ times more sensitive to dark matter self-interactions than the larger scale Bullet Cluster type measurement that hit the news in late March. The answer according to the authors: it isn't! The system is composed of four galaxies, each with a dark matter subhalo, infalling into a larger dark matter halo. The subhaloes are observed to have lagged behind after a long infall period, with the possible interpretation that the dark matter is experiencing some DM-DM drag force that the stars are not. The claim in this new preprint is that the Massey et al paper made the assumption that the stars and the associated DM subhalo develop completely independently. But clearly they are gravitationally bound! And this matters. When taken into account, it is clear that a much stronger dark matter self-interaction is necessary to explain the offsets of the subhaloes from the stars. They find a strength $\sigma/m_{DM}\sim 3 \text{ cm}^2\text{g}^{-1}$, in tension with the limit from the larger clusters (also from Massey et al...).
  • On the ATLAS on-Z excess, I count already six articles dedicated to discussing/explaining it. In particular, this one points out that an explanation in terms of the simplified General Gauge Mediation model taken as a benchmark in the ATLAS paper is inconsistent with other measurements. As shown below, the white band preferred by the on-Z excess is disfavoured by a collection of other measurements.


    There are at least a-few-papers which claim that a decay chain more like $\tilde g \to q\bar{q}\tilde \chi_2^0 \to q\bar{q} Z \chi_1^0$ with a somewhat compressed spectra can go some way to explaining the excess while remaining consistent with other observations.
  • On the AMS antiproton-proton "excess" there have been a few more preprints showing up on the arXiv. I took a quick look at this one, which does the sensible thing: notes that propagation models can fit the data fairly well, and that there is no unambiguous excess (though there are always some that see things another way...), nevertheless we can use these models along with the observations to bound the dark matter annihilation contribution at high energies -- which is the interesting physics after all!


    Above are the limits they derive on the annihilation cross-section into $b\bar{b}$ obtained assuming two different propagation models. What's interesting is that they compete with the Fermi dwarf spheroidal bounds for $m_{DM}\lesssim 100$ GeV, which is the region of interest for the galactic centre excess.
  • The Stawell Underground Physics Laboratory project aiming at setting up the southern hemisphere's first dark matter direct detection experiment looks like it's really coming along (It even has a Wiki page now)! There was a stakeholder event in Stawell on Tuesday and some buzz from the CAASTRO group on twitter...

  • Ellis, Gaillard, and Nanopoulos have uploaded "An Updated Historical Profile of the Higgs Boson" to the arXiv.
  • Another nice-couple of articles at Quanta Magazine on quantum phenomena.

Saturday, 18 April 2015

Friday wrap-up: 6.5 TeV, AMS, young pulsars, dark matter...

Wherein I list some (mostly) recent happenings, ramble a bit, and provide links, in an order roughly determined by importance and relevance to particle physics. Views are my own. Content very definitely skewed by my own leanings and by papers getting coverage, and it may not even be correct. It is a blog after all...

  • On this day last week we had the first 6.5 TeV beam fly around the LHC, and a day later we had both beams at once. You can read a little more at symmetry magazine.


  • AMS have presented their results on the cosmic ray proton/helium/lithium flux and the antiproton-proton ratio at a CERN mini-conference. Recordings of the talks are here and slides here. The press release is here. The plot they are pushing is the following one:

    Figure 1. Antiproton to proton ratio measured by AMS. As seen, the measured ratio cannot be explained by existing models of secondary production.

    The claim in the press release is, "This behavior cannot be explained by secondary production of antiprotons from ordinary cosmic ray collisions," with the suggestion that a new primary source(s) may be needed. But Sam Ting made sure during his talk to emphasise that it cannot be explained by existing secondary production models, and when presenting this figure he noted that there are many secondary production models, but "this is the one we choose" -- I wonder why... (an aside: he also in the same talk referred to his $J/\psi$ particle first as $J$ and then as $\psi$ on the same slide!). The point is that these models are very uncertain and the claim in the press release is unfounded. Indeed, there was a preprint on hep-ph yesterday which had the following to say: "Our first and main result is that there is no unambiguous antiproton excess that can be identified in the first place, and thus, at this stage, no real need for primary sources of antiprotons. Within errors, secondary astrophysical production alone can account for the data." Their Figure 2:


    So, don't believe the hype.
  • There was an arXiv preprint on Wednesday suggesting that young pulsars can explain the galactic centre excess. Their money plot is the following comparison of the expected dark matter spectrum with that from a prototypical young pulsar (Geminga).


  • Spectroscopic measurements of Reticulum II (here, here, and here) confirm it is an ultra-faint dwarf galaxy. Recall from the Hooper paper on the observed gamma ray excess, "In order for this excess to be compatible with the lack of significant gamma-ray detections from other dwarf galaxies... Reticulum II must contain a high density of dark matter, corresponding to $J \gtrsim 10^{19.6}\text{ GeV}^2/\text{cm}^{-5}$." One the new preprints has the J-factor measured at $10^{18.8\pm0.6}\text{ GeV}^2/\text{cm}^{-5}$ within 0.2 degs, and $10^{18.9\pm0.6}\text{ GeV}^2/\text{cm}^{-5}$ within 0.5 degs, and another has it at $10^{19.5^{+1.0(+1.6)}_{−0.6(−1.3)}}\text{ GeV}^2/\text{cm}^{-5}$ within 0.5 degs. So measurements seem to be disfavouring a dark matter interpretation. Also, it is of note that there is a radio source (likely a blazar) located 0.1 degs from the Ret II location which could be responsible for excess gamma rays...
  • An arXiv preprint (press release here) has observed that, in a system of four colliding elliptical galaxies, "each of the central galaxies retains a dark matter halo, but that (at least) one of these is spatially offset from its stars." The abstract adds, "With such a small physical separation, it is difficult to definitively rule out astrophysical effects operating exclusively in dense cluster core environments – but if interpreted solely as evidence for self-interacting dark matter, this offset implies a cross-section $\sigma_{DM}/m \sim (1.7\pm0.7)\times10^{−4} \text{ cm}^2/\text{g}\times(t_{infall}/10^9\text{yrs})^{−2}$, where $t_{infall}$ is the infall duration."

    We should keep in mind that these limits are based on the assumption that the interaction is velocity-independent, which is not true of a low-mass mediator. I don't have anything illuminating to add, but I do find it interesting that the previous study of colliding galaxy clusters set an upper limit of $\sigma_{DM}/m < 0.47 \text{ cm}^2/\text{g}$, and this measurement is almost four orders of magnitude smaller! Are measurements of these kinds of systems that much more sensitive? Why doesn't this system set an even stronger upper limit?
  • The "Evidence for dark matter in the inner Milky Way" saga appears to have reached an end. Both the comment and the reply to comment were updated this week, with the former reproducing a plot from a 1988 paper which is "in essence, identical to that of Iocco et al," and the latter writing, "In our letter we made a claim based on a specific technical point: that current data are constraining enough to make the claim robust against statistical and systematic errors. We believe we have made this point clear with our letter and two replies, and we shall not continue the discussion on the arXiv."
  • The Dark Energy Survey has produced a dark matter map (arXiv here, nature article here) of part of our sky using graviational lensing. Below is a heat map showing the mass density along with locations of galaxy clusters superimposed as grey dots. The map supports the standard picture that dark matter drives large-scale structure formation.

    photo
  • The EPS HEPP prizes were given out this week; the main prize went to James D. Bjorken “for his prediction of scaling behaviour in the structure of the proton that led to a new understanding of the strong interaction”, and to Guido Altarelli, Yuri L. Dokshitzer, Lev Lipatov, and Giorgio Parisi “for developing a probabilistic field theory framework for the dynamics of quarks and gluons, enabling a quantitative understanding of high-energy collisions involving hadrons”.
  • Strassler has been tackling the issue of dark matter searches at the LHC this week. He has a blog post and a new article for the layman.
  • Paul Jackson has written a blog post for the ATLAS blog on CoEPP and our conference in February.
  • Our understanding of the particle zoo as a function of time at Scientific American.
  • Frank Wilczek has a new book coming out in July, "A Beautiful Question: Finding Nature’s Deep Design."
  • Lastly, space images...
    • The first colour image of Pluto (and Charon) from New Horizons:

    • And here is our first view of Ceres from Dawn's new address:

      Ceres' North Pole

Friday, 13 March 2015

Friday wrap-up: ATLAS on-Z excess, CMS kinematic edge, new dwarfs, dark matter annihilation...

Wherein I list some (mostly) recent happenings, ramble a bit, and provide links, in an order roughly determined by importance and relevance to particle physics. Views are my own. Content very definitely skewed by my own leanings and by papers getting coverage, and it may not even be correct. It is a blog after all...

  • ATLAS released a preprint yesterday (submitted to EPJC), Search for supersymmetry in events containing a same-flavour opposite-sign dilepton pair, jets, and large missing transverse momentum..., that is interesting for two reasons.

    1. Remember the 2.6σ kinematic edge excess that CMS observed in their similar analysis originally released as a PAS in August last year? If not then see Tommaso Dorigo or Collider Blog for a summary... or don't, since ATLAS don't see any hint of it!

    2. They call CMS's excess, and then they raise, with a 3.0σ excess in a different signal region (SR). So let's talk about that...

    The search is for an on-Z opposite-sign same-flavour (OSSF) lepton pair + jets + MET. They are motivated by a gravitino LSP SUSY scenario with pair-produced gluinos which decay via $\tilde g\to qq\tilde\chi_1^0, \tilde\chi_1^0\to Z\tilde G$ (though it seems to me like something as simple as a vector-like quark could also work). Anyway, after typical preselection and requiring two OSSF leptons (if more than two are present they take the leading leptons), they define the on-Z signal region as: $$81< m_{l^+l^-}/\text{GeV}<101, \\ n_{jets}\ge2, \\ E_T^{miss}>225\text{ GeV,} \\ H_T>600\text{ GeV,} \\ \Delta\phi(jet_{12},E_T^{miss}>0.4,$$where $H_T$ is the scalar sum of the jet and lepton $p_T$ in the event, and the $\Delta\phi$ cut is designed to reject background from mismeasured jets faking large $E_T^{miss}$. And backgrounds are tough... $Z/\gamma^*+jets$ with mismeasured jets producing difficult-to-model instrumental $E_T^{miss}$ is potentially worrisome, but it is made negligible by the $\Delta\phi$ cut. Flavour-symmetric backgrounds (with a truth-level flavour ratio $ee:\mu\mu:e\mu$ of 1:1:2) from $t\bar{t}$, $WW$, single top, and $Z\to\tau\tau$ are dominant; they are estimated with a data-driven method using opposite-flavour data as a control region. Fake leptons are estimated from data.  Diboson, $t\bar{t}V$, $t\bar{t}VV$, and $t+Z$ are estimated from MC, making sure not to double count the flavour-symmetric component.

    The expected and observed number of events as a function of invariant mass in the dielectron and dimuon channels are shown below:


    For the sum of both channels the expected background is 10.6±3.2 with 29 events observed, which ends up corresponding to a 3.0σ excess.

    Now, CMS did a similar search in the on-Z SR in their paper and didn't see anything. So are the results consistent? It's possible. The CMS SR wasn't quite as tight as the one employed by ATLAS. After similar preselection, for an on-Z signal region defined as $$81< m_{l^+l^-}/\text{GeV}<101, \\ n_{jets}\ge2, \\ E_T^{miss}>200\text{ GeV,}$$CMS have an expected background of $\approx$ 87.3±12.1 with 72 events observed. So who knows, maybe if CMS demanded $H_T>600$ GeV they would see something too, or maybe not... 
  • The biggest news of the week comes from Tuesday's astro-ph listings. This is not my area, so I can't comment intelligently, but anyone can read an abstract and look at Figures, so I will just sum up here for completeness and convenience (click the figures to make them larger)...

    1. Fermi-LAT released their Pass 8 constraints on dark matter annihilation (already largely known from preliminary results). They rule out dark matter masses $\lesssim 100$ GeV for a thermal relic annihilating to $b\bar{b}$ or $\tau\tau$. Those results are cutting into the best fit regions for the galactic centre excess.


    2. The Dark Energy Survey (DES) Collaboration has located eight new dwarf satellite galaxy candidates (of the Milky Way and/or Magellanic Clouds), and an independent Cambridge group has located nine using the publicly released DES deep photometry data. You can read the press release here.



    3. The new satellite candidates are prime spots to look for dark matter annihilation... so Fermi-LAT went and did it already! Assuming that the new candidates are dwarf spheroidals, they set a limit on the annihilation cross-section that rivals their Pass 8 results with known dwarfs above.


    4. But the story isn't over yet, because an independent group (which includes the Cambridge group that found nine candidates) has reported a gamma-ray excess, consistent with DM annihilation, in one of the new dwarf candidates. [Edit: The candidate is Reticulum II or DES J0335.6−5403, the green line in the above Fermi-LAT plot, which appears by eye to be the only line of all the candidates to have a weakened limit in the 10−few×100 GeV DM mass region, the region that would produce the excess.]


    And the dark matter annihilation saga continues...
  • Protons bunches half-circled the LHC beam pipe last weekend for the first time since the long shutdown began! Injector tests sent bunches from the SPS into the LHC ring and through ALICE and LHCb on their way to beam dumps. Both ALICE and LHCb recorded splash events when the beam was made to collide with a target.


    You can play with the LHCb event here. First fully circulating beam is expected at the end of the month.
  • PRL has published the Planck/BICEP2/Keck joint analysis, along with a Viewpoint article which tells some of the story -- we are reminded of the following: "... alternative models may be detectable with the next generation of experiments, some of which claim a sensitivity to r as small as 0.01. The competition is fierce, with at least six funded ground-based experiments underway (including the third version of BICEP), several balloon-borne experiments, and a number of proposed space missions."
  • There's a nice feature at ScienceNews about the AMS experiment, the positron excess, and Samuel Ting; on the (unreleased) preliminary antiproton data he remarks: "intriguing".
  • Published in Nature yesterday, the Cassini orbiter has detected tiny rock grains emitted from the plumes of the Saturnian moon Enceladus, hinting at a subsurface ocean. You can read the articles at NASA, ESA, or Scientific American. Meanwhile a team using Hubble have used observations of aurora to indirectly suggest that there is a subsurface ocean on Ganymede, Jupiter's largest moon. Nice to see that there are complementary ways to measure these things.
  • Today Rosetta is trying to listen for a signal from the Philae lander on Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko. ESA released a cartoon video about it a few days ago [3 minutes]. The Lander Project Manager says, "It will probably still be too cold for the lander to wake up, but it is worth trying."