NLO matrix elements and truncated showers

By S. Höche, F. Krauss, M. Schönherr, F. Siegert. 2010

248 citations recorded by the source corpus.

In this publication, an algorithm is presented that combines the ME+PS approach to merge sequences of tree-level matrix elements into inclusive event samples [1] with the Powheg method, which combines exact next-to-leading order matrix element results with the parton shower [2, 3]. It was developed in parallel to the MEnloPS technique discussed in [4] and has been implemented in the event generator Sherpa [5, 6]. The benefits of this approach are exemplified by some first predictions for a number of processes, namely the production of jets in e+e−-annihilation, in deep-inelastic ep scattering, in association with single W, Z or Higgs bosons, and with vector boson pairs at hadron colliders.

Subfields: Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/77c40b7c56d3bcee6a903f6a4aed30e491347d47

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

Coherent parton showers with local recoils (2009, background): “tching. [29] gives a comprehensive overview of current implementations and shows detailed comparisons. Recent improvements address previous deﬁciencies of the CKKW algorithm in ﬁlling the phase space [30,31] that had been discussed extensively in [32]. Some problems have been overcome with the help ”
Les Houches 2017: Physics at TeV Colliders Standard Model Working Group Report (2017, methodology): “For correctly combining the matrix elements in multijetproduction processes with the parton shower, SHERPA has adapted the MEPS@LO method [924] at LO and its generalisation MEPS@NLO [932] at NLO.”
The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations (2014, unknown): “[145–148, 192–197]).”
Soft triple-real radiation for Higgs production at N3LO (2013, unknown): “[15–35] See, for example, refs.”
QCD matrix elements + parton showers. The NLO case (2012, methodology): “MENLOPS The MENLOPS method described in [39] is used to merge an NLO+PS sample for the W+0-jet process with tree-level matrix elements for the higher multiplicity W + 1, 2, 3, 4-jet processes.”
NLO QCD matrix elements + parton showers in e+e− → hadrons (2012, methodology): “The original algorithm, based on the POWHEG method [10, 23], was independently proposed in [13] and [14].”
General-purpose event generators for LHC physics (2011, methodology): “One of the key features of Sherpa is a generic implementation of the technique for combining tree-level matrix elements with parton showers that was presented in [75], see Section 5.”
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, methodology): “The renormalization and factorization scales are dynamically determined on an event-by-event basis according to the matching algorithm [70].”
Hard photon production and matrix-element parton-shower merging (2009, methodology): “s oﬀ-shell to allow for a branching process. For QCD parton evolution we choose to employ the parton-shower algorithm of [63], including the ordering variables for initial-state evolution proposed in [62]. This means that the Sudakov form factor for ﬁnal-state evolution reads ∆QCD (ij) (µ 2 0,Q ) = ”
Mass effects in the Higgs-gluon coupling: boosted vs. off-shell production (2014, methodology): “[85, 86] or, where not otherwise stated at NLO according to the Meps@Nlo algorithm [87, 88].”
Event generation with Sherpa 2.2 (2019, methodology): “resummation in both regions. Originally these ideas have been proposed for the combination of tree-level matrix elements in [26, 27], and have been implemented, in variations, in all event generators [124, 125, 126, 127, 28, 128, 129, 29, 130, 131]. A dedicated comparison can, for example, be found ”