Confusion about ISR

Asked by Sheikh Farah Tabira

Hello,

me and my group members were pondering if it is really necessary to add a photon and the respective cuts when we want to generate the ISR process in whizard or is just switching on ISR sufficient? We were looking at the ISR plots for mu+mu- > XX for both with and without photon + cuts needed to select the ISR photon. It appears that the plot without photon+cuts retains a similar shape to the bare process - just with lower values as opposed to the one with photon+cuts. We are confused about what we should stick with. Thank you for your help. This was the script used for photon+cuts,

model = NewBP1ufo (ufo)
betaH = 1.47112767
Ma = 325 GeV
WAh2 = 2.11606063 GeV
Wh3 = 2.967256 GeV
Wh2 = 0.002660598 GeV
process mmaa = e2 , e2bar => a, a, A

compile

beams = e2 , e2bar => isr

!beams_pol_density = @(-1), @(-1)
!beams_pol_fraction = 80%, 20%
?fatal_beam_decay = false
isr_q_max = 20 GeV
isr_alpha = 1./137.
epa_q_min = 5 GeV
epa_x_min = 0.01

$description = "mumuxx with isr"
$x_label = "$\sqrt{s}$/GeV"
$y_label = "$\sigma(s)$/fb"
x_min = 800 GeV
x_max = 1000 GeV

cuts = let subevt @meA = select if Index > 2 [A] in
  all E > 10 GeV [@meA] and all Theta > 7 degree [@meA]

$title = "mumuxx with ISR"
plot mumuxxisr {$draw_options = "withcolor red"}

scan sqrts = (800 GeV => 1000 GeV /+ 10 GeV) {
 integrate (mmaa) {iterations = 5:50000, 3:100000}
 record mumuxxisr(sqrts, integral (mmaa))
 }

compile_analysis { $out_file = "mumuxxisr" }

Question information

Language:
English Edit question
Status:
Solved
For:
WHIZARD Edit question
Assignee:
Krzysztof Mekala Edit question
Solved by:
Krzysztof Mekala
Solved:
Last query:
Last reply:
Revision history for this message
Best Krzysztof Mekala (krzysztofmekala) said :
#1

Dear Tabira,
as far as I understand, you try to generate events with an invisible final state, and to evaluate the Muon Collider discovery reach, you would like to probe the mono-photon signature. In this case, you must get sure that the generated "accompanying" photons are reliably simulated. Please note that the ISR photons are not purely physical particles and, as a general rule, they should not be used in analyses of this kind; they are important though to take beam energy losses into account. In other words, one should simulate hard, detectable photons as a part of the hard process mu+mu- -> XX + gamma(s), keeping ISR switched on to accommodate soft, undetectable photon emissions. However, a set of cuts (both on Matrix Element and ISR photons) is required to match the two regimes and avoid double counting. The problem is well-described in the literature for e+e- colliders (the matching procedure: arXiv:2004.14486, an example analysis: arXiv:2107.11194) and I would suggest following this approach also in this case.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Revision history for this message
Sheikh Farah Tabira (farahtabira) said :
#2

Thanks Krzysztof Mekala, that solved my question.

Revision history for this message
Yehia Abdelaziz (yehia95) said :
#3

There is something that I need to make sure of here. Do I need to add an extra photon in the final state for the isr to work properly even if I already have visible particles produced in the final state accompanying the dark matter? like e+ e- > X X l+ l-

Revision history for this message
Juergen Reuter (j.r.reuter) said :
#4

Hi Yehia,
if your process is e+ e- -> l+ l- XX (X=invisible) , than you do not have to add extra photons in the hard process/matrix element in order to model ISR, if your process is "monophoton", so e+e- -> gamma + XX , then you absolutely must include the photon
in your hard process. There are then additional photons from the ISR, for which the reference Krzysztof has given above shows a potential algorithm of matching.
Cheers,
    JRR

Revision history for this message
Yehia Abdelaziz (yehia95) said :
#5

Thank you Juergen.

Revision history for this message
Juergen Reuter (j.r.reuter) said :
#6

Great, can we mark this as solved?