Non-perturbative QCD effects in jets at hadron colliders

By M. Dasgupta, L. Magnea, G. Salam. 2007

196 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We discuss non-perturbative QCD contributions to jet observables, computing their dependence on the jet radius R, and on the colour and transverse momentum of the parton initiating the jet. We show, using analytic QCD models of power corrections as well as Monte Carlo simulations, that hadronisation corrections grow at small values of R, behaving as 1/R, while underlying event contributions grow with the jet area as R 2 . We highlight the connection between hadronisation corrections to jets and those for event shapes in e + e − and DIS; we note the limited dependence of our results on the choice of jet algorithm; finally, we propose several measurements in the context of which to test or implement our predictions. The results presented here reinforce the motivation for the use of a range of R values, as well as a plurality of infrared-safe jet algorithms, in precision jet studies at hadron colliders.

Subfields: Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/37e16a9da56ef671f4335509b77cf8ec0d28d4c0

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Nuclear and High Energy Physics

Citations in the corpus

On the characterisation of the underlying event (2009, methodology): “They can also serve as an input to analytical methods of accounting for the average UE correction to a jet’s transverse momentum [11, 12] and to approaches that correct for the UE on a jet-by-jet and event-by-event basis [13], as well as for related work that seeks to optimise jet definitions.”
Jet substructure at the Tevatron and LHC: new results, new tools, new benchmarksReport prepared by the participants of the BOOST 2011 Workshop at Princeton University, 22–26 May 2011. L Asquith (lasquith@hep.anl.gov), S Rappoccio (rappocc@fnal.gov) and C K Vermilion (verm@uw.edu), editors. (2011, unknown): “Basic models have been formulated to quantify contributions from the underlying event and pile-up [100, 14, 6, 101].”
Phenomenology of event shapes at hadron colliders (2010, background): “At hadron colliders, analytical predictions for non-perturbative (NP) effects are available only for a limited number of jet-observbales [36, 112–114].”
Towards jetography (2009, background): “From these, one deduces a value of R that minimises the squared sum of hadronisation and UE pieces [132],”
The Catchment Area of Jets (2008, methodology): “[10]), with substantial fluctuations in the amount from one event to another.”
General-purpose event generators for LHC physics (2011, background): “Thus this mechanism also agrees, at least qualitatively, with the notion of a finite effective low-scale value of αS, which is suggested by studies of hadronization corrections to event shapes[150, 151, 178] and jet profiles [123].”
Jet mass and substructure of inclusive jets in sqrt(s) = 7 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS experiment (2012, result): “This is in agreement with predictions of scaling of the mean mass [48, 49].”
Small-radius jets to all orders in QCD (2014, background): “This study should, among other things, also consider the role of power suppressed hadronisation corrections proportional to ΛQCD/pt, which are known to receive a 1/R enhancement at small R [22, 66, 67].”
Jet shapes and jet algorithms in SCET (2010, background): “Power corrections to the pT of a jet arising from perturbative emissions (as well as from hadronization and the underlying event in pp collisions) for various jet algorithms were explored in [36].”
Les Houches 2017: Physics at TeV Colliders Standard Model Working Group Report (2017, methodology): “This is due to the hadronization correction and the MPI corrections exhibiting different scaling behaviors with R [1020].”
Soft drop (2014, methodology): “While we take the small jet radius approximation in this paper, it is known to be reasonable even up to R0 ∼ 1 [93, 122].”
Looking Inside Jets (2019, background): “[79]), one sometimes uses ∫ d(4)k3δ(k 2 3) as a phase-space integration, in which case Eq.”
Towards an understanding of jet substructure (2013, background): “Considerable caution is needed, however, as concerns the actual numerical prediction from these formulae: we have ignored hadron-mass effects, which are known to be substantial [67, 68]; we have ignored the (complicated) issue that the two-pronged structure of the jet will undoubtedly modify the pat”