Zll0to3jets sample

Asked by Walaa Elmetenawee on 2021-04-24

Dear generator experts,

I'm trying to generate Zll0to3jets sample to be used as a backgroung for VBF Higgs analysis,
due to the process is quite heavy I generated it in 4 separate gridpacks (*) to be used as jet binned samples.

But I got worried when I saw the comments about the symmetry factor that discussed here,
https://answers.launchpad.net/mg5amcnlo/+question/696360

The only difference is that we decay the Z using Madspin.
Are we also affected by the symmetry factor in this case?
And what will be the solution in this case, taking into account that doing the process as p p > l+ l- l+ l- jjj@1 will be very hard and our analysis needs only one Z on-shell and the other off-shell.

Thanks a lot, Cheers,

Walaa Elmetenawee

(*)
generate p p > z l+ l- @1
generate p p > z l+ l- j@1
generate p p > z l+ l- jj@1
generate p p > z l+ l- jjj@1

Question information

Language:
English Edit question
Status:
Answered
For:
MadGraph5_aMC@NLO Edit question
Assignee:
No assignee Edit question
Last query:
Last reply:

I have never fully studied such type of scenario.
I believe that If you veto the double resonant production you should be fine.
A clean way to veto such region at generation is by doing

> generate p p > z l+ l- $ z @1

but you can also do the same at the analysis level.

Cheers,

Olivier

> On 24 Apr 2021, at 22:20, Walaa Elmetenawee <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> New question #696742 on MadGraph5_aMC@NLO:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/mg5amcnlo/+question/696742
>
> Dear generator experts,
>
> I'm trying to generate Zll0to3jets sample to be used as a backgroung for VBF Higgs analysis,
> due to the process is quite heavy I generated it in 4 separate gridpacks (*) to be used as jet binned samples.
>
> But I got worried when I saw the comments about the symmetry factor that discussed here,
> https://answers.launchpad.net/mg5amcnlo/+question/696360
>
> The only difference is that we decay the Z using Madspin.
> Are we also affected by the symmetry factor in this case?
> And what will be the solution in this case, taking into account that doing the process as p p > l+ l- l+ l- jjj@1 will be very hard and our analysis needs only one Z on-shell and the other off-shell.
>
> Thanks a lot, Cheers,
>
> Walaa Elmetenawee
>
> (*)
> generate p p > z l+ l- @1
> generate p p > z l+ l- j@1
> generate p p > z l+ l- jj@1
> generate p p > z l+ l- jjj@1
>
> --
> You received this question notification because you are an answer
> contact for MadGraph5_aMC@NLO.

Walaa Elmetenawee (welmeten) said : #2

Dear Olivier,

Thanks a lot for your answer, In our analysis, we already veto the double resonant production because we ask the mass of the 4l to be in the mass window "118<m4l<130 GeV", Is this enough?

Cheers,

Walaa

Hi,

> the mass window "118<m4l<130 GeV", Is this enough?

This is not a cut preventing the double resonance, so i will have some doubt that such cut is enough.
But independently of that you have to run some validation to be sure if this is working or not.

Cheers,

Olivier

> On 26 Apr 2021, at 13:30, Walaa Elmetenawee <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> Question #696742 on MadGraph5_aMC@NLO changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/mg5amcnlo/+question/696742
>
> Walaa Elmetenawee posted a new comment:
> Dear Olivier,
>
> Thanks a lot for your answer, In our analysis, we already veto the
> double resonant production because we ask the mass of the 4l to be in
> the mass window "118<m4l<130 GeV", Is this enough?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Walaa
>
> --
> You received this question notification because you are an answer
> contact for MadGraph5_aMC@NLO.

Can you help with this problem?

Provide an answer of your own, or ask Walaa Elmetenawee for more information if necessary.

To post a message you must log in.