The Fully Corrected Dijet Invariant Mass Distribution from Run 1B
Contact Person: Björn Hinrichsen
Date Blessed: January 28, 1999
CDF Note 4102
We have used 
pb
of data from Run 1B to measure the fully
corrected dijet mass differential cross section.
The dijet mass ranges from 180 to 1020GeV/c
and the
differential cross section extends over six orders of magnitude.
We present quantitative comparisons of the corrected data with
predictions from next-to-leading order QCD calculations,
obtained from the JETRAD Monte Carlo program.
We see the same trend towards an excess in the data at high dijet masses as
in the jet-
distribution at high .
Plots
Figure 1 The partially corrected differential dijet invariant mass cross section. The data have not yet been corrected for resolution smearing effects. The vertical bars represent the statistical errors, the horizontal bars represent the widths of the dijet mass bins. The bins are approximately 10% wide, reflecting the resolution of the detector.
Figure 2: The unsmearing correction factors, K, the ratios of smeared and true distributions, for the data.
Figure 3: The systematic uncertainties on the dijet mass cross section as a function of the dijet mass. Shown are the total systematic uncertainty (thick solid), the absolute jet energy scale (widely dash-dotted), the relative jet energy scale (dotted), the combined uncertainties on the unsmearing procedure (dashed) and the combined uncertainties on the total luminosity and the prescale factors (narrowly dash-dotted).
Figure 4: The systematic uncertainties on the dijet mass cross section, due to uncertainties on the absolute energy scale, broken down into the components: calibration (dashed), fragmentation (dotted), stability (thin solid), underlying event (dash-dotted) and total (thick solid). The uncertainties shown were obtained by using the parameterization of the data.
Figure 5:
A comparison of the fully corrected data (full circles) with predictions
from the JETRAD Monte Carlo program, using CTEQ4M with
(solid line).
The error bars represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties, added
in quadrature.
Figure 6:
A comparison of the CDF data with predictions from
the JETRAD program for CTEQ4M (full circles)
and comparisons of other parameterizations with CTEQ4M:
CTEQ4HJ (solid), MRST (dotted), MRST(
)(dash-dotted) and
MRST(
) (dashed).
All QCD calculations were performed with .
The error bars indicate the statistical uncertainties and the shaded
area represents the combined systematic uncertainty.
Figure 7: A comparison of the CDF data with predictions from the JETRAD program using the CTEQ4HJ parameterization.
Figure 8: A comparison of the CDF data with JETRAD predictions using the MRST parameterization.
Figure 9:
A comparison of the CDF data with JETRAD predictions
using the MRST() parameterization.
Figure 10:
A comparison of the CDF data with JETRAD predictions
using the MRST() parameterization.
Figure 11:
A comparison of CDF data (solid circles) with results
from the DØ collaboration (open circles). The systematic errors are
indicated by the shared area (CDF) and the solid lines (DØ),
respectively. The JETRAD predictions are for CTEQ4M with
.
Note that the kinematical ranges are different for the two
experiments.
This document was generated using the LaTeX2HTML translator Version 96.1-h (September 30, 1996) Copyright © 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, Nikos Drakos, Computer Based Learning Unit, University of Leeds.
The command line arguments were:
latex2html public.tex.
The translation was initiated by Bjoern Hinrichsen on Wed Feb 3 13:05:20 CST 1999