Query regarding decay of same particle to different final states

Hi,

> 1. For a process like :
>
> p p > z z,
>
> is it possible for me to decay one of the Zs to l+ l- and the other to j j at the parton level in madgraph ?

you can do

generate p p > z z, z > l+ l-, z > j j

> 2. If I want to have a mu+ mu- final state which can come from on-shell as well as off-shell Z-boson, is this
> syntax correct :
>
> p p > z $ z, z > mu+ mu-
>
> Or is there any other way ?

No this syntax is not correct.
In general, it does not make any sense to ask for off-shell Z without including the photon contribution.
but here is the syntax:
generate p p > mu+ mu- / a

Obviously the result is not physical on part of the phase-space.

Cheers,

Olivier

> On Mar 9, 2016, at 08:52, Shankha Banerjee <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> New question #288325 on MadGraph5_aMC@NLO:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/mg5amcnlo/+question/288325
>
> Dear Experts,
>
> I have two naive queries :
>
> 1. For a process like :
>
> p p > z z,
>
> is it possible for me to decay one of the Zs to l+ l- and the other to j j at the parton level in madgraph ?
>
> 2. If I want to have a mu+ mu- final state which can come from on-shell as well as off-shell Z-boson, is this
> syntax correct :
>
> p p > z $ z, z > mu+ mu-
>
> Or is there any other way ?
>
> It will really help me if you can help me regarding these.
>
> Thank you very much for your time.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Shankha.
>
> --
> You received this question notification because you are an answer
> contact for MadGraph5_aMC@NLO.

Hi Olivier,

Thank you very much for your response.

The actual process that I want to generate is :

p p to mu+ mu- matched to n jets. But, I can not go beyond a point because I will have too many diagrams.

So is this process okay ?

define v = z a
generate p p > mu+ mu- @1
add process p p > mu+ mu- j @2
add process p p > v v $ v, v > mu+ mu-, v > j j @3
add process p p > v v j $ v, v > mu+ mu-, v > j j @4
add process p p > v v j j $ v, v > mu+ mu-, v > j j @5

Is it a proper way to get mu+ mu- matched up to 4 jets ?

Thank you very much for your time and help.

Best regards,

Shankha.

Hi,

This does not make any sense,
1) you mix some V production with some VV production.
2) “$ a" do not make any sense (for any process)
3) “$ z” is quite weird in this case (I would say irrelevant)

Cheers,

Olivier

> On Mar 9, 2016, at 09:33, Shankha Banerjee <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> Question #288325 on MadGraph5_aMC@NLO changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/mg5amcnlo/+question/288325
>
> Status: Answered => Open
>
> Shankha Banerjee is still having a problem:
> Hi Olivier,
>
> Thank you very much for your response.
>
> The actual process that I want to generate is :
>
> p p to mu+ mu- matched to n jets. But, I can not go beyond a point
> because I will have too many diagrams.
>
> So is this process okay ?
>
> define v = z a
> generate p p > mu+ mu- @1
> add process p p > mu+ mu- j @2
> add process p p > v v $ v, v > mu+ mu-, v > j j @3
> add process p p > v v j $ v, v > mu+ mu-, v > j j @4
> add process p p > v v j j $ v, v > mu+ mu-, v > j j @5
>
> Is it a proper way to get mu+ mu- matched up to 4 jets ?
>
> Thank you very much for your time and help.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Shankha.
>
> --
> You received this question notification because you are an answer
> contact for MadGraph5_aMC@NLO.

Hi Olivier,

I get your point. Thank you very much.

I will generate and match mu+ mu- + jets

generate p p > mu+ mu- @1
add process p p > mu+ mu- j @2
add process p p > mu+ mu- j j @3 and so on

and

Z Z + jets with Z -> mu+ mu-, Z > j j separately.

generate p p > z z, z > mu+ mu-, z > j j @1
add process p p > z z j, z > mu+ mu-, z > j j @2
add process p p > z z j j, z > mu+ mu-, z > j j @3

and so on

As per your yesterday's response, should I also put $ t t~ after the z z for the second case for a proper matching ?

Sorry for these silly queries.

Thank you very much once again.

Best regards,

Shankha.

Dear Olivier,

Thank you so much for entertaining these naive queries.

This solves my queries.

Best regards,

Shankha.

Thanks Olivier Mattelaer, that solved my question.