run_card definition of missET

Hi,

For the adding additional particle for the missing_et cut of the run_card,
you need to modify the file

SubProcesses/setcuts.f

and after the line
         if (abs(idup(i,1,iproc)).eq.12) is_a_nu(i)=.true. ! no cuts on ve ve~
and an equivalent line for your particle (with the appropriate pdg code)

Cheers,

Olivier

On 07 May 2015, at 16:56, Swasti Belwal <email address hidden> wrote:

> Question #266628 on MadGraph5_aMC@NLO changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/mg5amcnlo/+question/266628
>
> Description changed to:
> Hello developers,
>
> I have a question regarding the missET definition used by run_card.dat.
>
> In run_card, misset = minimum missing Et (sum of neutrino's momenta).
>
> I assume that if I have an invisible particle in the process it will not
> be accounted in the misset considering the above description. Also, in
> the plot_card.dat , I can see that the misset includes the neutrinos as
> well as my invisible particle.
>
> Is there a way I can change this definition of misset for my
> run_card.dat and include my invisible particle to it?
>
> I also had a look at the cuts.f, cuts.inc and setcuts.f files.
>
> Cheers!
>
> --
> You received this question notification because you are an answer
> contact for MadGraph5_aMC@NLO.

Thank you very much for the quick reply Olivier!

Cheers!
Swasti

Just a short query Olivier. Is there a way to cross-check if the additional particle is the part of parton level missET after I have changed the code?

You can put some print statement in cuts.f to see if the cut is applied correctly or not and then look at the log.

Cheers,

Olivier
On 07 May 2015, at 18:01, Swasti Belwal <email address hidden> wrote:

> Question #266628 on MadGraph5_aMC@NLO changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/mg5amcnlo/+question/266628
>
> Status: Solved => Open
>
> Swasti Belwal is still having a problem:
> Just a short query Olivier. Is there a way to cross-check if the
> additional particle is the part of parton level missET after I have
> changed the code?
>
> --
> You received this question notification because you are an answer
> contact for MadGraph5_aMC@NLO.

Hi Olivier,

Sorry for asking again but my concept of missingET defined in Madgraph run_card is still not clear.

I am generating an event like p p > DM DM j, where DM is my dark matter particle. When I see the definition in run_card and in the setcuts.f and cuts.f, the missingET is defined only as the transverse momenta of neutrinos.

For the above definition of missingET, if there are no neutrinos in my process, my result should be zero say for a missingET cut of 200 GeV. Whereas, this does not seem to be the case for my analysis as my events survive a strong missingET cut.

Is the definition of missingET modified in the code somewhere such that missingET = transverse momentum of the jet at parton level?

Also, is the missingET plot at parton level (plotted using plot_card) same as defined in the run_card ? The missingET defined in plot_card takes my DM particle also into account.

Another question is that is the plot_card same at both parton level and pythia level, which seems to be the case?

Thanks in advance!

Dear Swatsi,

> For the above definition of missingET, if there are no neutrinos in my
> process, my result should be zero say for a missingET cut of 200 GeV.
> Whereas, this does not seem to be the case for my analysis as my events
> survive a strong missingET cut.

The cut for the missing et is the following one:
c- check the et
      if(debug.and.ptemp(0).eq.0d0) write (*,*) 'No et miss in event'
      if(debug.and.ptemp(0).gt.0d0) write (*,*) 'Et miss =',pt(ptemp(0)),' ',misset,':',missetmax
      if(debug.and.ptemp2(0).eq.0d0) write (*,*) 'No leptons in event'
      if(debug.and.ptemp(0).gt.0d0) write (*,*) 'Energy of leptons =',pt(ptemp2(0))
      if(ptemp(0).gt.0d0) then
         notgood=(pt(ptemp(0)) .lt. misset).or.
     & (missetmax.ge.0d0.and.pt(ptemp(0)) .gt. missetmax)
         if (notgood) then
            if(debug) write (*,*) ' missing et cut -> fails'
            passcuts=.false.
            return
         endif
      endif

As you can see if your 4 momenta of the missing et is exactly 0 (which means that you do not have any neutrino in the final state,
then the cut is simply bypassed. We can like such feature or not, but this is what is implemented.

> Is the definition of missingET modified in the code somewhere such that
> missingET = transverse momentum of the jet at parton level?

No

> Also, is the missingET plot at parton level (plotted using plot_card)
> same as defined in the run_card ? The missingET defined in plot_card
> takes my DM particle also into account.

No it is not, the particle present in the MET for the plot are those defined in the plot_card:
The default line include the neutralino:
mET 12 -12 14 -14 16 -16 1000022 # Missing ET class, name is reserved

The particles defined as neutrino are defined in setcuts.f like said in my previous answer.

I guess that the pdg code of your DM is the same one as the neutralino which explains why you have the correct plot by default.

> Another question is that is the plot_card same at both parton level and
> pythia level, which seems to be the case?

Yes it is.

Cheers,

Olivier

On 12 May 2015, at 11:41, Swasti Belwal <email address hidden> wrote:

> Question #266628 on MadGraph5_aMC@NLO changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/mg5amcnlo/+question/266628
>
> Status: Answered => Open
>
> Swasti Belwal is still having a problem:
> Hi Olivier,
>
> Sorry for asking again but my concept of missingET defined in Madgraph
> run_card is still not clear.
>
> I am generating an event like p p > DM DM j, where DM is my dark matter
> particle. When I see the definition in run_card and in the setcuts.f
> and cuts.f, the missingET is defined only as the transverse momenta of
> neutrinos.
>
> For the above definition of missingET, if there are no neutrinos in my
> process, my result should be zero say for a missingET cut of 200 GeV.
> Whereas, this does not seem to be the case for my analysis as my events
> survive a strong missingET cut.
>
> Is the definition of missingET modified in the code somewhere such that
> missingET = transverse momentum of the jet at parton level?
>
> Also, is the missingET plot at parton level (plotted using plot_card)
> same as defined in the run_card ? The missingET defined in plot_card
> takes my DM particle also into account.
>
> Another question is that is the plot_card same at both parton level and
> pythia level, which seems to be the case?
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> --
> You received this question notification because you are an answer
> contact for MadGraph5_aMC@NLO.