Agreement Between "Polarized" Pythia and NLO pQCD
We're using an afterburner framework that turns Pythia into something like a LO polarized event generator to study any biases introduced by our triggers on A_LL measurements. This page compares the asymmetries generated by Pythia to theoretical predictions from GRSV.
Cuts
- MC and reco vz positions inside 60 cm
- |eta| of reco primary track < 1.0
- dca of associated global < 1.0
- fit points > 25
- select pions using geant ID 8 (pi-plus) or 9 (pi-minus)
No trigger requirements are imposed.
Weighting
I combined MC samples 3_4 through 55_65 using the following cross sections and event counts
xsec = {
'3_4' : 1.287, 384593
'4_5' : 3.117*10**-1, 586568
'5_7' : 1.360*10**-1, 380791
'7_9' : 2.305*10**-2, 404272
'9_11' : 5.494*10**-3, 413651
'11_15' : 2.228*10**-3, 418547
'15_25' : 3.895*10**-4, 407427
'25_35' : 1.016*10**-5, 99998
'above_35' : 5.299*10**-7, 119995
'45_55' : 2.830*10**-8, 119995
'55_65' : 1.433*10**-9 119998
}
Plots
First off, here are the asymmetries integrated over all subprocesses. The left column is pi-plus, the right column is pi-minus. The agreement for postive charges seems basically acceptable to me, but pi-minus is off by quite a lot:
If I restrict to g-g, q-g, and q-q subprocesses individually, the difference between the two is obviously in the q-g subprocess contribution (as expected):
It seems to me that the lack of agreement between our Monte Carlo and the theoretical predictions could be due in part to a lack of gg / over-abundance of qg in the subprocess mix. Here are plots of the subprocess mix from Pythia:
compare that to the prediction from Vogelsang et al. for inclusive pi0 production, where gg is the primary contributor until ~3 GeV:
In particular, only the 3_4 GeV partonic sample has more g-g than q-g at any pion p_T. I'm going to try including the 2_3 GeV sample in my studies and see if that bolsters the gg contribution.
- kocolosk's blog
- Login or register to post comments