This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Coarse-grained binning in Drell-Yan transverse momentum spectra

Wenxiao Zhan University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China Siqi Yang Email: [email protected] University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China Minghui Liu University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China Francesco Hautmann University of Oxford, Oxford, UK University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium Liang Han University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China
Abstract

We report a study of the determination of the intrinsic transverse momentum of partons, the intrinsic kTk_{T}, from the dilepton transverse momentum pTp_{T} in Drell-Yan (DY) production at hadron colliders. The result shows that a good sensitivity to the intrinsic kTk_{T} distribution is achieved by measuring relative ratios between the cross sections of suitably defined low-pTp_{T} and high-pTp_{T} regions. The study is performed through both a pseudo-data test and an extraction from measurements of the DY process by the CMS collaboration. Since the methodology does not rely on any dedicated partition of bins, this pTp_{T}-ratio observable requires less special treatment in very low pTp_{T} regions, and propagates lower systematic uncertainties induced from unfolding or momentum migration, in contrast with previous proposals of using a fine-binning measurement of the differential cross section.

1 Introduction

Measurements of transverse momentum spectra of electroweak bosons via Drell-Yan (DY) lepton-pair production [1] are at the core of many aspects of the physics program at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), ranging from precision determinations of Standard Model parameters in the strong and electroweak sectors, to non-perturbative features of hadron structure and transverse momentum dependent (TMD) parton distribution functions [2].

Recent applications of DY transverse momentum measurements include the determination of the strong coupling from perturbative Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) predictions matched with resummation [3, 4]; the extraction of TMD parton distributions both in analytic-resummation [5, 6, 7, 8] and parton-branching [9] approaches; the modeling of TMD contributions in soft-collinear effective theory [10]; the determination of intrinsic-kTk_{T} parameters in the tuning of Monte Carlo event generators [11].

A common thread in these applications is that high-precision measurements of the low transverse-momentum region (ΛQCD<pT(ll)m(ll)\Lambda_{\rm{QCD}}{\raisebox{-2.58334pt}{\hbox to0.0pt{$\,\sim\,$\hss}}\raisebox{1.72218pt}{$\,<\,$}}p_{T}(ll)\ll m(ll), where pTp_{T} and mm are the dilepton’s transverse momentum and invariant mass) with fine binning in pTp_{T} will improve our ability to unravel QCD dynamics, involving multiple soft-gluon emissions as well as the non-perturbative intrinsic transverse motion of partons. See for instance the role of fine-binned pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) measurements in the context of analytic-resummation studies [12] and parton-branching studies [13].

However, recent measurements of the DY process by the ATLAS [14] and CMS [15] collaborations indicate that such fine-binned treatments require an extremely delicate control of systematic uncertainties. Experimentally, the determination of the low-pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) fine-binned structure is challenging. Under these circumstances, it becomes important to assess the capabilities of methodologies which do not require the fine-binned measurement of pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) distributions, and rather rely on coarse-grained binning.

In this paper we explore one such methodology, by studying the intrinsic kTk_{T} determination in TMD parton distributions from the measurement of ppZ/γl+lpp\to Z/\gamma\to l^{+}l^{-} in the region 0<pT(ll)<pT,max0<p_{T}(ll)<p_{T,{\rm{max}}} (with pT,maxp_{T,{\rm{max}}} small compared to m(ll)m(ll)) based on coarse-grained partitions of this region. We subdivide the pTp_{T} region into two bins with separation momentum psp_{s}, pT<psp_{T}<p_{s} and pT>psp_{T}>p_{s}, and investigate the sensitivity to the intrinsic kTk_{T} distribution from measuring the ratio between the low pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) cross section (predominantly sensitive to TMD dynamics and resummed soft-parton radiation) and the high pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) cross section (predominantly sensitive to fixed-order hard-parton radiation) as a function of varying psp_{s}. We study the role of bin-to-bin migration effects on the pTp_{T} ratio. Although the high pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) cross section is not sensitive to intrinsic kTk_{T}, it acts as a reference in the relative ratio between the strength of the intrinsic kTk_{T} and fixed-order contribution. We find that the intrinsic kTk_{T} can be determined by measuring its overall strength through the pTp_{T}-ratio instead of measuring the low pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) differential cross section. This conclusion is relevant, from a practical viewpoint, in order to achieve a good determination of intrinsic kTk_{T} from analyses of experimental data with reduced systematic uncertainties. We illustrate this methodology by presenting an extraction of intrinsic kTk_{T} from DY pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) measurements by the CMS collaboration [16].

To perform this study, we use the parton branching (PB) approach [17, 18] to TMD evolution. This approach provides the basis for including TMD distributions in parton shower Monte Carlo calculations, and has been shown to give a consistent description of DY pTp_{T} spectra [9] as well as of the multiple-jet structure associated with DY production [19]. At inclusive level, it can be related to the evolution of collinear parton distribution functions (PDF), and correctly describes deep-inelastic scattering structure functions [20]. Given the wide applicability of the PB TMD approach, this provides a useful framework to assess the performance of the pTp_{T}-ratio methodology.

The paper is organized as follows. In Sect. 2, we briefly review the PB TMD approach. In Sect. 3, we propose the pTp_{T}-ratio as a new observable and methodology for studies of TMD dynamics. The sensitivity of the pTp_{T}-ratio to the intrinsic kTk_{T} distribution is investigated with a pseudo-data sample, and is compared to that from the fine-binning structure of the low-pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) differential cross section. In Sect. 4, we apply the methodology to the pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) distribution measured by the CMS collaboration [16] at 13 TeV across a wide range in DY mass from 50 GeV to 1 TeV. We give conclusions in Sect. 5.

2 PB TMD method

In this section we briefly describe the main features of the PB approach [17, 18, 20] which will be used for the analysis in this work. We first recall the PB evolution equations; then we discuss the intrinsic-kTk_{T} distribution, the soft-gluon resolution scale, the treatment of the strong coupling, and the application of the method to the computation of DY pTp_{T} distributions.

We consider the TMD parton distribution of parton flavor aa, Aa(x,𝐤,μ2)A_{a}(x,{\bf k},\mu^{2}), as a function of the longitudinal momentum fraction xx, the transverse momentum 𝐤{\bf k} and the evolution scale μ\mu. According to Refs. [18, 20], the distributions Aa(x,𝐤,μ2)A_{a}(x,{\bf k},\mu^{2}) fulfill evolution equations of the form

Aa(x,𝐤,μ2)=Δa(μ2,μ02)Aa(x,𝐤,μ02)\displaystyle{A}_{a}(x,{\bf k},\mu^{2})=\Delta_{a}(\mu^{2},\mu_{0}^{2}){A}_{a}(x,{\bf k},\mu_{0}^{2}) (2.1)
+\displaystyle+ bd2𝝁πμ2dzab[Δ;P(R);Θ]\displaystyle\sum_{b}\int\frac{\textrm{d}^{2}{\boldsymbol{\mu}}^{\prime}}{\pi{\mu}^{\prime 2}}\int\textrm{d}z\ {\cal E}_{ab}[\Delta;P^{(R)};\Theta]
×\displaystyle\times Ab(x/z,𝐤+(1z)𝝁,μ2),\displaystyle{A}_{b}(x/z,{\bf k}+(1-z){\boldsymbol{\mu}}^{\prime},\mu^{\prime 2})\;,

where Δa(μ2,μ02)\Delta_{a}(\mu^{2},\mu_{0}^{2}) is the Sudakov form factor and ab{\cal E}_{ab} are the evolution kernels, which are specified in Ref. [18] as functionals of the Sudakov form factors Δa\Delta_{a}, of the real-emission splitting functions PabRP_{ab}^{R}, and of phase space constraints collectively denoted by Θ\Theta in Eq. (2.1). The functions that appear in the evolution kernels are perturbatively computable as power series expansions in the strong coupling αs\alpha_{s}. The explicit expressions of these expansions for all flavor channels are given to two-loop order in Ref. [18].

The evolution in Eq. (2.1) is expressed in terms of two branching variables, zz and 𝝁{\boldsymbol{\mu}}^{\prime}: zz is the longitudinal momentum transfer at the branching, controlling the rapidity of the parton emitted along the branching chain; μ=𝝁2\mu^{\prime}=\sqrt{{\boldsymbol{\mu}}^{\prime 2}} is the mass scale at which the branching occurs, and is related to the branching’s kinematic variables according to the ordering condition. It is worth noting that the double evolution in rapidity and mass for TMD distributions can also be formulated in a CSS [21, 22], rather than PB, approach — see e.g. [23, 12, 24]. A study of the relationship of the PB Sudakov evolution kernel with the CSS formalism is performed in [25, 26]. Eq. (2.1) is obtained for the case of angular ordering [27, 28, 29], which gives μ=q/(1z)\mu^{\prime}=q_{\perp}/(1-z), where qq_{\perp} is the emitted parton’s transverse momentum. The angular-ordered branching is motivated by the treatment of the endpoint region in the TMD case [18, 30].

The initial evolution scale in Eq. (2.1) is denoted by μ0\mu_{0} (μ0>ΛQCD\mu_{0}>\Lambda_{\rm{QCD}}), and is usually taken to be of order 1 GeV. The distribution Aa(x,𝐤,μ02){A}_{a}(x,{\bf k},\mu_{0}^{2}) at scale μ0\mu_{0} in the first term on the right hand side of Eq. (2.1) provides the intrinsic kTk_{T} distribution. This is a nonperturbative boundary condition to the evolution equation, and may be determined from comparisons of theory predictions to experimental data. In the calculations of this paper, for simplicity we will parameterize 𝒜a(x,𝐤,μ02){{\cal A}}_{a}(x,{\bf k},\mu^{2}_{0}), following previous applications of the PB TMD method [20, 9], as

𝒜0,b(x,kT2,μ02)\displaystyle{\cal A}_{0,b}(x,k_{T}^{2},\mu_{0}^{2}) =\displaystyle= f0,b(x,μ02)\displaystyle f_{0,b}(x,\mu_{0}^{2})
×\displaystyle\times exp(|kT2|/2σ2)/(2πσ2),\displaystyle\exp\left(-|k_{T}^{2}|/2\sigma^{2}\right)/(2\pi\sigma^{2})\;,

with the width of the Gaussian distribution given by σ=qs/2\sigma=q_{s}/\sqrt{2}, independent of parton flavor and xx, where qsq_{s} is the intrinsic-kTk_{T} parameter.

The evolution kernels ab{\cal E}_{ab} and Sudakov form factors Δa\Delta_{a} in Eq. (2.1) contain kinematic constraints which embody the phase space of the branchings along the parton cascade. These can be described, using the “unitarity” picture of QCD evolution [31], by separating resolvable and non-resolvable branchings in terms of a resolution scale to classify soft-gluon emissions [17]. (See e.g. [32] for a study of the interplay of resolution scale with transverse momentum recoils in parton showers.) Applications of the PB TMD method can be carried out either by taking the soft-gluon resolution scale to be a fixed constant value close to the kinematic limit z=1z=1 or by allowing for a running, μ{\mu}^{\prime}-dependent resolution (see, e.g., discussions in [29, 33, 9]). In the computations of this paper, we will take fixed resolution scale. This is the same as what is done in the studies of Refs. [20, 13, 9], which we will use as benchmarks.

The scale at which the strong coupling αs\alpha_{s} is to be evaluated in Eq. (2.1) is a function of the branching variable. Two scenarios are commonly studied in PB TMD applications: i) αs=αs(μ2)\alpha_{s}=\alpha_{s}({\mu}^{\prime 2}); ii) αs=αs(q2)=αs(μ2(1z)2)\alpha_{s}=\alpha_{s}(q_{\perp}^{2})=\alpha_{s}({\mu}^{\prime 2}(1-z)^{2}). Case i) corresponds to DGLAP evolution [34, 35, 36] , while case ii) corresponds to angular ordering, e.g. CMW evolution [27, 28]. In Ref. [20], fits to precision deep inelastic scattering HERA data [37] are performed for both scenarios i) and ii), using the fitting platform xFitter [38, 39]. It is found that fits with good χ2\chi^{2} values can be achieved in either case. Correspondingly, PB-NLO-2018 Set1 (with the DGLAP-type αs(𝐪2)\alpha_{s}({\bf q}^{\prime 2})) and PB-NLO-2018 Set2 (with the angular-ordered CMW-type αs(qT2)\alpha_{s}(q_{T}^{2})) are obtained.

On the other hand, it is found that PB-NLO-2018 Set2 provides a much better description, compared to PB-NLO-2018 Set1, of measured Z/γZ/\gamma pTp_{T} spectra at the LHC [13] and in low-energy experiments [40], and of di-jet azimuthal correlations near the back-to-back region at the LHC [41, 42]. Further, it is shown that a good description is also obtained for DY + jets final-state distributions [43, 44, 19, 45]. We will therefore base the analysis of this work on PB-NLO-2018 Set2. As in [20, 9], the strong coupling is modeled according to a “pre-confinement” picture [46, 47] as αs=αs(max(qc2,𝐪2))\alpha_{s}=\alpha_{s}(\max(q^{2}_{c},{\bf q}_{\perp}^{2})), where qcq_{c} is a semi-hard scale, taken to be qc=1q_{c}=1 GeV. The PB TMD sets are available from the TMDlib library [48, 49].

The calculation of DY production cross sections in the PB TMD method proceeds as described in Ref. [13]. NLO hard-scattering matrix elements are obtained from the MadGraph5_aMC@NLO [50] (hereafter, MCatNLO) event generator and matched with TMD parton distributions and showers obtained from PB evolution [20, 18, 17] and implemented in the Cascade Monte Carlo event generator [51, 52], using the subtractive matching procedure proposed in [13] and further analyzed in [45]. In particular, the Herwig[53, 54] subtraction terms are used in MCatNLO, as they are based on the same angular ordering conditions as the PB TMD distributions [45]. Final state parton showers are generated from Pythia6.428 [55], including photon radiation.

Ref. [9] uses the approach described above to compute theoretical results for DY transverse momentum distributions, and to make a determination of the intrinsic-kTk_{T} parameter qsq_{s} in Eq. (2) by performing fits of the results to DY experimental measurements of DY pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) [16, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63]. The study [9] includes a detailed treatment of statistical, correlated and uncorrelated uncertainties. The CMS data [16] at center of mass energy s=\sqrt{s}= 13 TeV cover DY invariant masses from 50 GeV to 1 TeV. The other data cover energies from 13 TeV down to 38 GeV. With the fitted qsq_{s} values [9], PB TMD distributions are thus obtained. Further discussions of the PB TMD distributions [9] are given in [64, 65, 66, 67].

In the next section we will use Monte Carlo predictions from the PB TMD method to explore the feasibility of extracting intrinsic-kTk_{T} distributions from experimental measurements with coarse-grained binning in the low pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) region.

3 Ratio of low and high pTp_{T} bins

In this section we present the pTp_{T}-ratio observable and methodology for studies of TMD dynamics. We will focus on the process ppZ/γl+lpp\to Z/\gamma\to l^{+}l^{-} in the transverse momentum region 0<pT(ll)<pT,max0<p_{T}(ll)<p_{T,{\rm{max}}}, where pT,maxp_{T,{\rm{max}}} is taken to be small compared to the invariant mass m(ll)m(ll).

We construct PB TMD predictions for the DY pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) distribution, as described in the previous section, from MCatNLO + Cascade Monte Carlo, with initial-scale TMD distributions given in Eq. (2). To explore the intrinsic-kTk_{T} parameter space, we generate 7 template samples with different qsq_{s} values using the TMD grid files available on the TMDlib [48] website: these are qsq_{s} = 0.5 GeV (using the PB TMD set PB-NLO-HERAI+II-2018-set2 [20]), qsq_{s} = 0.59, 0.74, 0.89 GeV (using the set PB-NLO-HERAI+II-2023-set2-qs=0.74 [9]), and qsq_{s} = 0.96, 1.04, 1.12 GeV (using the set PB-NLO-HERAI+II-2023-set2-qs=1.04 [9]). We study the influence of the intrinsic-kTk_{T} width by examining the templates firstly in the full phase space (later on we will consider an experimental fiducial phase space). Results are shown in Fig. 1 over the range pT(ll)<20p_{T}(ll)<20 GeV.

Refer to caption
Figure 1: Transverse momentum distributions from the template samples with different intrinsic kTk_{T} Gaussian width qsq_{s} in full phase space. The ratio plot at the bottom is made by taking the ratio to the distribution with qsq_{s} = 0.89.

The pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) shape in the rising part of the spectrum is altered by qsq_{s}, with the peak position shifting to higher pTp_{T} when qsq_{s} increases. However, the trend is mild, suggesting that the essential information on the intrinsic kTk_{T} width may be extracted from a well-defined ratio between the low and high pTp_{T} regions. To this end, we introduce a momentum parameter psp_{s} to separate the regions pT<psp_{T}<p_{s} and pT>psp_{T}>p_{s}, and construct the 2-bin pTp_{T}-ratio between the lower and higher pTp_{T} regions. The pTp_{T}-ratio is defined from the integral of event numbers in the relatively low (pLp_{L}) and high (pHp_{H}) region, i.e., from the two-binned pT(ll)p_{T}(ll),

pTratio=pL/pH.p_{T}\mathrm{-ratio}={p_{L}}/{p_{H}}. (3.1)

The uncertainty of the pTp_{T}-ratio is obtained from propagating statistical uncertainties in the low and high pTp_{T} bins, and is given by

σpTratio2=(pL2σpH2+pH2σpL2)/pH4.\sigma_{p_{T}\mathrm{-ratio}}^{2}=({p_{L}^{2}\sigma_{p_{H}}^{2}+p_{H}^{2}\sigma_{p_{L}}^{2}})/{p_{H}^{4}}. (3.2)

The 2-bin distribution and corresponding pTp_{T}-ratio are plotted, for the case of a given value ps=3p_{s}=3 GeV, in Fig. 2. The fall-off of the pTp_{T}-ratio with increasing qsq_{s} indicates that one may be able to extract TMD parameters from this ratio instead of the complete fine-binned pTp_{T} shape, which results into a significant advantage from the standpoint of controlling experimental systematic uncertainties.

Refer to caption
Figure 2: The 2-bin distribution of lower and higher pTp_{T} (outer) and the corresponding pTp_{T}-ratio versus qsq_{s} (inner).

The separation momentum psp_{s} will play a critical role in the qsq_{s} extraction from the pTp_{T}-ratio. TMD sensitivity arises primarily from the low-pTp_{T} region. If psp_{s} is too low inside this region, a proportion of soft-gluon splitting transverse momenta will be integrated into the upper region, causing a loss of sensitivity to TMD parameter determination. If, on the other hand, psp_{s} is higher than the peak, the information on low pTp_{T} will tend to become undetectable.

We next perform a sensitivity test on both the fine-binned pTp_{T} and the pTp_{T}-ratio. We test the former with different bin width from 0.5 GeV to 3 GeV, to examine the potential of the fine-binned pTp_{T} shape in extracting qsq_{s}. We test the latter, on the other hand, focusing on the sensitivity change due to different choice of psp_{s}. We shift psp_{s} from 1.5 GeV to 4 GeV to find an optimal definition of the pTp_{T}-ratio, as well as to verify whether it has statistically the same sensitivity as the fine-binned pTp_{T} shape. The pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) greater than 10 GeV is expected to be ancillary in TMD performance studies. In this test, we will consider pT,max=p_{T,{\rm{max}}}= 10 GeV, 20 GeV, in a similar spirit to previous studies of intrinsic-kTk_{T} distributions (see e.g. Refs. [8, 9, 12]).

In this test, we choose the sample with qs=0.89q_{s}=0.89 as the pseudo-data, and extract qsq_{s} with the PB TMD replicas in the phase space with final-state lepton selections pT(l±)>25p_{T}(l^{\pm})>25 GeV and |η(l±)|<2.4|\eta(l^{\pm})|<2.4, in which leptons are dressed with photons reconstructed within ΔR=(Δη)2+(Δϕ)2<0.1\Delta R=\sqrt{(\Delta\eta)^{2}+(\Delta\phi)^{2}}<0.1. This is close to the fiducial phase space in real experiments at ATLAS and CMS. Sensitivity is represented by the fitting uncertainty of qsq_{s}. Each sample in PB TMD template contains 100 million events. The fitting is performed with least square method, in which the estimator χ2\chi^{2} is defined as

χ2=ij(miμi)Cij1(mjμj)\chi^{2}=\sum_{ij}(m_{i}-\mu_{i})C^{-1}_{ij}(m_{j}-\mu_{j}) (3.3)

with mim_{i} and μi\mu_{i} being the observed and predicted data point, respectively, and CijC_{ij} the covariance matrix. We consider uncorrelated statistical uncertainties from the pseudo-data and template as the only sources contributing to CijC_{ij}, making it a diagonal matrix. The fitting uncertainties in both cases are depicted in Fig. 3. The result indicates that the pTp_{T}-ratio is as sensitive as the fine-binned pTp_{T} shape.

Refer to caption
Figure 3: Uncertainties from binned pTp_{T} and from pTp_{T}-ratio. The uncertainties from different bin widths of binned pTp_{T} are drawn in straight lines, while the uncertainties given by pTp_{T}-ratio are marked and smoothed by curves. The abscissa of each marker is the corresponding psp_{s}.

In real experiments, momentum resolution causes bin-to-bin migration. Since the migration effect is a dominant systematic uncertainty, it is essential to verify that such effect on the pTp_{T}-ratio is not destructive. To study this, we apply a 3% resolution on the four-momentum of the dressed leptons as

precoμ(l±)=pμ(l±)×(1+g)p^{\mu}_{reco}(l^{\pm})=p^{\mu}(l^{\pm})\times(1+g) (3.4)

where gg follows a Gaussian distribution 𝒢(0,0.03)\mathcal{G}(0,0.03). The migration effect is illustrated in Fig. 4. It moves the peak position to a higher pTp_{T} value, which is a similar trend as the qsq_{s} effect. Also, owing to this the optimal separation choice psp_{s} is different from the non-migration scenario. If psp_{s} is defined correctly in this case, we expect the behavior to be the same as it is at truth level. We also note that in the bottom plot in Fig. 4 the relative ratio for pT(ll)<1p_{T}(ll)<1 GeV is smaller at the reco-level. This should result in a mild decrease in sensitivity.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 4: The pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) distributions when the resolution effect is taken into account. The top plot shows the difference in the pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) distribution before and after this effect. The bottom plot shows the difference in the relative ratio between the qs=0.5q_{s}=0.5 GeV and qs=0.89q_{s}=0.89 GeV cases.

We now repeat the sensitivity test after the 3% energy resolution is applied to the dressed leptons. The results are shown in Fig. 5. The uncertainties are slightly larger than those in Fig. 3. Also, by comparing the fitting uncertainties in the cases of fine-binned pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) and pTp_{T}-ratio, we see that the decrease in sensitivity due to the migration effect is similar. We are led to conclude that the pTp_{T}-ratio still has a good sensitivity to the intrinsic kTk_{T}, so that this methodology can be applied directly in the experiments for TMD performance studies.

Refer to caption
Figure 5: Uncertainties from binned pTp_{T} and from pTp_{T}-ratio with 3% energy resolution applied.

4 Extraction of qsq_{s} from pTp_{T}-ratio

Having performed a test with pseudo-data in the previous section, in this section we move on to consider a real experimental data analysis.

DY pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) spectra are measured at the LHC with bin widths equal to or greater than 1 GeV. Measuring the fine-binned pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) structure, on the other hand, is challenging. Sizeable systematic uncertainties have been reported in recent DY differential cross section measurements [14, 15], with luminosity of approximately 36 fb1fb^{-1} data collected in 2016, especially for the pT(ll)<2p_{T}(ll)<2 GeV bins. This is due to the uncertainties mostly induced from lepton efficiency and momentum resolution. Moreover, since the bin-to-bin correlation of the unfolding method uncertainties and momentum migration uncertainties are negative, increasing the bin numbers in such regions inevitably increases these systematic uncertainties.

Given these difficulties in achieving finer binning in the very low pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) range, we next test the pTp_{T}-ratio methodology of the previous section, based on less fine binning in the low-pTp_{T} fiducial region, by applying it to real experimental data. We emphasize that the purpose of this study is not to carry out a precision extraction of qsq_{s}, but to perform a feasibility study for the 2-bin pTp_{T}-ratio in the context of TMD parameters determination.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 6: Comparison of pTp_{T} distributions from the PB TMD samples with CMS data [16] in five mllm_{ll} ranges. PB-NLO TMD Set2 with qs=0.5q_{s}=0.5 GeV, 0.89 GeV and 1.12 GeV are shown in the figure, as well as the measured data. The error bars represent the square root of the diagonal elements of the covariance matrix of model and data.

The CMS collaboration has measured the pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) distribution in a wide mass range from 50 GeV to 1 TeV, with a bin width of 1 GeV in the DY invariant mass bin around the ZZ-boson mass [16]. This measurement has been used for the determination of the qsq_{s} dependence on DY mass in Ref. [9]. We here perform an extraction of qsq_{s} from this measurement using the pTp_{T}-ratio, and compare the results with those in Ref. [9]. Besides testing the feasibility of the pTp_{T}-ratio proposal with real data, we also aim to check that the pTp_{T}-ratio is not biased by the high-pTp_{T} region, where contributions from higher jet multiplicities are important [43, 19].

The selections of the leptons are

  • |η|<2.4|\eta|<2.4 for both lepton,

  • pT>25p_{T}>25 GeV for leading lepton,

  • pT>20p_{T}>20 GeV for subleading lepton.

We use dressed-level leptons, defined with ΔR<\Delta R< 0.1. The scale uncertainties are treated as fully correlated, and computed by varying the renormalization and factorization scales by a factor of 2 separately, excluding the two extreme cases. Since the model-induced statistical uncertainty is negligible comparing to the experimental uncertainty, the final covariance matrix CijC_{ij} comprises total covariance matrix from experiment and scale uncertainty:

Cij=Cijmeas.+σiμR/FσjμR/FC_{ij}=C_{ij}^{meas.}+\sigma_{i}^{\mu_{R/F}}\sigma_{j}^{\mu_{R/F}} (4.1)

The description of the CMS data by the theoretical predictions is shown in Fig. 6. In our study, the pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) range is the same as in Ref. [9] – 6 GeV for the first mllm_{ll} bin, 7 GeV for the second bin, and 8 GeV for the rest. This limitation prevents the ratio from being biased by the difference between prediction and data in the higher pTp_{T} region. The choice of psp_{s} is largely restricted by the measurement, which affects the final sensitivity, as is suggested in the sensitivity study in Sect. 3. We stress that, if the pTp_{T}-ratio is used for TMD parameter extractions, the choice of the psp_{s} value will need careful investigation. For our test in this paper, psp_{s} is set to 2 GeV for all mDYm_{DY} bins.

Final results are reported in Fig. 7. For comparison, the statistical uncertainties and scale uncertainties from data are considered, and compared to those in the analysis [9]. The uncertainties labeled with data at 68% confidence level are obtained from the qsq_{s} gap defined by χ2=χmin2+1\chi^{2}=\chi^{2}_{min}+1, and should be compared with the uncertainties labeled with data in Ref. [9]. Another source of uncertainties comes from the choice of the pTp_{T} range. In Ref. [9], this is estimated by varying the numbers of bins in the fit. In this study, we obtain it in the same way. For the last two mDYm_{DY} bins, it is not estimated for the lack of statistics. The result in every mDYm_{DY} region is consistent with the previous result [9].

Refer to caption
Figure 7: Determination of intrinsic kTk_{T} parameter qsq_{s}. The upper panel contains the qsq_{s} values extracted independently in different mDYm_{DY} bins, compared with the results in Ref. [9]. The error bars represent the combinations of the corresponding uncertainties in the lower pad. The lower panel contains a comparison of each source of uncertainties. In the last two bins we only consider data uncertainties.

5 Conclusion

In this paper we propose the pT(ll)p_{T}(ll)-ratio, which is defined as the ratio of low and high transverse momentum region of DY lepton pairs, as a sensitive observable and methodology for the extraction of a TMD parameter, the intrinsic kTk_{T} Gaussian width qsq_{s}. We firstly review the basic idea of the parton branching method for TMD evolution, and the calculation of pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) in the DY process. We then point out that the sensitivity of the pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) shape to the intrinsic kTk_{T} distribution actually lies in the shift of the spectrum from low pTp_{T} to high pTp_{T}. This observation leads to the proposal of the pT(ll)p_{T}(ll)-ratio. We numerically test the sensitivity of the pTp_{T}-ratio to qsq_{s} by comparing its statistical uncertainty with the same procedure on fine-binning pTp_{T} structure. The result shows that the pTp_{T}-ratio has comparable sensitivity to the fine-binned pTp_{T} shape.

The precision in the most sensitive pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) regions in real measurements at the LHC is largely restricted by experimental systematic uncertainties. These make the fine-binned pTp_{T} structure difficult to access experimentally, and point to the need to explore approaches based on coarse-grained binning. The relative ratio of low and high pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) regions avoids the fine binning. In this paper, we illustrate its effectiveness by extracting qsq_{s} from the pTp_{T}-ratio in a wide invariant-mass range of DY lepton pairs measured by the CMS collaboration recently. Since the CMS pTp_{T} is binned into 2 GeV (or 1 GeV), we can only conduct this test by rebinning the distributions and covariance matrices, which means we cannot arbitrarily choose the separation momentum psp_{s}. Nevertheless, the result is consistent with previous results obtained from the low-pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) distribution of DY lepton pairs as a function of invariant mass, and has the same level of precision.

From this perspective, this methodology can be tested in future studies by using more complex TMD parameterization forms, or investigating extreme conditions of very small or very large qsq_{s} values, to make sure the extraction is unbiased. It could be used in forthcoming experiments for TMD performance studies, since it avoids the need to control large systematics in the low pT(ll)p_{T}(ll) region. Unlike the extraction from a pTp_{T} distribution that has been already binned, the pTp_{T}-ratio requires a dedicated study of the separation momentum psp_{s}, affecting the sensitivity to TMD parameters, for example along the lines of the pseudo-data test carried out in this work.

Acknowledgement

We are grateful to Hannes Jung for discussion and for assistance with the use of PB TMD templates. We thank Laurent Favart, Jibo He, Hengne Li, Louis Moureaux and Hang Yin for useful conversations. This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grants No.11721505, No.12061141005, and No.12105275, and supported by the “USTC Research Funds of the Double First-Class Initiative”.

References

  • [1] S.. Drell and Tung-Mow Yan “Massive Lepton Pair Production in Hadron-Hadron Collisions at High-Energies” [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 25, 902 (1970)] In Phys. Rev. Lett. 25, 1970, pp. 316–320 DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.25.316
  • [2] R. Angeles-Martinez “Transverse Momentum Dependent (TMD) parton distribution functions: status and prospects” In Acta Phys. Polon. B 46.12, 2015, pp. 2501–2534 DOI: 10.5506/APhysPolB.46.2501
  • [3] Stefano Camarda, Giancarlo Ferrera and Matthias Schott “Determination of the strong-coupling constant from the Z-boson transverse-momentum distribution” In Eur. Phys. J. C 84.1, 2024, pp. 39 DOI: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-12373-2
  • [4] Georges Aad “A precise determination of the strong-coupling constant from the recoil of ZZ bosons with the ATLAS experiment at s=8\sqrt{s}=8 TeV”, 2023 arXiv:2309.12986 [hep-ex]
  • [5] Alessandro Bacchetta et al. “Unpolarized transverse momentum distributions from a global fit of Drell-Yan and semi-inclusive deep-inelastic scattering data” In JHEP 10, 2022, pp. 127 DOI: 10.1007/JHEP10(2022)127
  • [6] Alessandro Bacchetta et al. “Flavor dependence of unpolarized quark transverse momentum distributions from a global fit” In JHEP 08, 2024, pp. 232 DOI: 10.1007/JHEP08(2024)232
  • [7] Marcin Bury et al. “PDF bias and flavor dependence in TMD distributions” In JHEP 10, 2022, pp. 118 DOI: 10.1007/JHEP10(2022)118
  • [8] Valentin Moos, Ignazio Scimemi, Alexey Vladimirov and Pia Zurita “Extraction of unpolarized transverse momentum distributions from the fit of Drell-Yan data at N4LL” In JHEP 05, 2024, pp. 036 DOI: 10.1007/JHEP05(2024)036
  • [9] I. Bubanja “The small kTk_{\textrm{T}} region in Drell-Yan production at next-to-leading order with the parton branching method” In Eur. Phys. J. C 84.2, 2024, pp. 154 DOI: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12507-0
  • [10] Georgios Billis, Johannes K.. Michel and Frank J. Tackmann “Drell-Yan Transverse-Momentum Spectra at N3LL and Approximate N4LL with SCETlib”, 2024 arXiv:2411.16004 [hep-ph]
  • [11] A. Hayrapetyan “Energy scaling behavior of intrinsic transverse momentum parameters in Drell-Yan simulation”, 2024 arXiv:2409.17770 [hep-ph]
  • [12] Francesco Hautmann, Ignazio Scimemi and Alexey Vladimirov “Non-perturbative contributions to vector-boson transverse momentum spectra in hadronic collisions” In Phys. Lett. B 806, 2020, pp. 135478 DOI: 10.1016/j.physletb.2020.135478
  • [13] A. Bermudez Martinez “Production of Z-bosons in the parton branching method” In Phys. Rev. D 100.7, 2019, pp. 074027 DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.074027
  • [14] G. Aad et al. “Measurement of the transverse momentum distribution of Drell-Yan lepton pairs in proton-proton collisions at s=13\sqrt{s}=13TeV with the ATLAS detector” In The European Physical Journal C 80.7, 2020 DOI: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-8001-z
  • [15] A.. Sirunyan et al. “Measurements of differential Z boson production cross sections in proton-proton collisions at s\sqrt{s} = 13 TeV” In Journal of High Energy Physics 2019.12, 2019 DOI: 10.1007/jhep12(2019)061
  • [16] Armen Tumasyan “Measurement of the mass dependence of the transverse momentum of lepton pairs in Drell-Yan production in proton-proton collisions at s\sqrt{s} = 13 TeV” In Eur. Phys. J. C 83.7, 2023, pp. 628 DOI: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11631-7
  • [17] F. Hautmann et al. “Soft-gluon resolution scale in QCD evolution equations” In Phys. Lett. B772, 2017, pp. 446–451 DOI: 10.1016/j.physletb.2017.07.005
  • [18] F. Hautmann et al. “Collinear and TMD Quark and Gluon Densities from Parton Branching Solution of QCD Evolution Equations” In JHEP 01, 2018, pp. 070 DOI: 10.1007/JHEP01(2018)070
  • [19] A. Bermudez Martinez, F. Hautmann and M.. Mangano “Multi-jet merging with TMD parton branching” In JHEP 09, 2022, pp. 060 DOI: 10.1007/JHEP09(2022)060
  • [20] A. Bermudez Martinez “Collinear and TMD parton densities from fits to precision DIS measurements in the parton branching method” In Phys. Rev. D 99.7, 2019, pp. 074008 DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.99.074008
  • [21] John C. Collins, Davison E. Soper and George F. Sterman “Transverse Momentum Distribution in Drell-Yan Pair and W and Z Boson Production” In Nucl. Phys. B 250, 1985, pp. 199–224 DOI: 10.1016/0550-3213(85)90479-1
  • [22] John Collins “Foundations of Perturbative QCD” 32, Cambridge Monographs on Particle Physics, Nuclear Physics and Cosmology Cambridge University Press, 2023 DOI: 10.1017/9781009401845
  • [23] Ignazio Scimemi and Alexey Vladimirov “Systematic analysis of double-scale evolution” In JHEP 08, 2018, pp. 003 DOI: 10.1007/JHEP08(2018)003
  • [24] Francesco Hautmann, Ignazio Scimemi and Alexey Vladimirov “Determination of the rapidity evolution kernel from Drell-Yan data at low transverse momenta” In SciPost Phys. Proc. 8, 2022, pp. 123 DOI: 10.21468/SciPostPhysProc.8.123
  • [25] A. Bermudez Martinez “The Parton Branching Sudakov and its relation to CSS” In PoS EPS-HEP2023, 2024, pp. 270 DOI: 10.22323/1.449.0270
  • [26] Aleksandra Lelek “NNLL Transverse Momentum Dependent evolution in the Parton Branching method” In 42nd International Symposium on Physics In Collision, 2024 arXiv:2412.09108 [hep-ph]
  • [27] G. Marchesini and B.. Webber “Monte Carlo Simulation of General Hard Processes with Coherent QCD Radiation” In Nucl. Phys. B310, 1988, pp. 461–526 DOI: 10.1016/0550-3213(88)90089-2
  • [28] S. Catani, B.. Webber and G. Marchesini “QCD coherent branching and semiinclusive processes at large x” In Nucl. Phys. B349, 1991, pp. 635–654 DOI: 10.1016/0550-3213(91)90390-J
  • [29] F. Hautmann, L. Keersmaekers, A. Lelek and A.. Van Kampen “Dynamical resolution scale in transverse momentum distributions at the LHC” In Nucl. Phys. B 949, 2019, pp. 114795 DOI: 10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2019.114795
  • [30] F. Hautmann “Endpoint singularities in unintegrated parton distributions” In Phys. Lett. B 655, 2007, pp. 26–31 DOI: 10.1016/j.physletb.2007.08.081
  • [31] B.. Webber “Monte Carlo Simulation of Hard Hadronic Processes” In Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 36, 1986, pp. 253–286 DOI: 10.1146/annurev.ns.36.120186.001345
  • [32] S. Dooling, P. Gunnellini, F. Hautmann and H. Jung “Longitudinal momentum shifts, showering, and nonperturbative corrections in matched next-to-leading-order shower event generators” In Phys. Rev. D87.9, 2013, pp. 094009 DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.87.094009
  • [33] S. Sadeghi Barzani “PB TMD fits at NLO with dynamical resolution scale” In 29th International Workshop on Deep-Inelastic Scattering and Related Subjects, 2022 arXiv:2207.13519 [hep-ph]
  • [34] V.. Gribov and L.. Lipatov “Deep inelastic e p scattering in perturbation theory” In Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 15, 1972, pp. 438–450
  • [35] Guido Altarelli and G. Parisi “Asymptotic Freedom in Parton Language” In Nucl. Phys. B 126, 1977, pp. 298–318 DOI: 10.1016/0550-3213(77)90384-4
  • [36] Yuri L. Dokshitzer “Calculation of the Structure Functions for Deep Inelastic Scattering and e+ e- Annihilation by Perturbation Theory in Quantum Chromodynamics.” In Sov. Phys. JETP 46, 1977, pp. 641–653
  • [37] H. Abramowicz “Combination of measurements of inclusive deep inelastic e±p{e^{\pm}p} scattering cross sections and QCD analysis of HERA data” In Eur. Phys. J. C 75.12, 2015, pp. 580 DOI: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3710-4
  • [38] H. Abdolmaleki “xFitter: An Open Source QCD Analysis Framework. A resource and reference document for the Snowmass study”, 2022 arXiv:2206.12465 [hep-ph]
  • [39] S. Alekhin “HERAFitter” In Eur. Phys. J. C 75.7, 2015, pp. 304 DOI: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3480-z
  • [40] A. Bermúdez Martínez “The transverse momentum spectrum of low mass Drell–Yan production at next-to-leading order in the parton branching method” In Eur. Phys. J. C 80.7, 2020, pp. 598 DOI: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-8136-y
  • [41] M.. Abdulhamid “Azimuthal correlations of high transverse momentum jets at next-to-leading order in the parton branching method” In Eur. Phys. J. C 82.1, 2022, pp. 36 DOI: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-09997-1
  • [42] A. Bermudez Martinez and F. Hautmann “Azimuthal di-jet correlations with parton branching TMD distributions” In 29th International Workshop on Deep-Inelastic Scattering and Related Subjects, 2022 arXiv:2208.08446 [hep-ph]
  • [43] A. Bermudez Martinez, F. Hautmann and M.. Mangano “TMD evolution and multi-jet merging” In Phys. Lett. B 822, 2021, pp. 136700 DOI: 10.1016/j.physletb.2021.136700
  • [44] A. Bermudez Martinez, F. Hautmann and M.. Mangano “Multi-jet physics at high-energy colliders and TMD parton evolution”, 2021 arXiv:2109.08173 [hep-ph]
  • [45] H. Yang “Back-to-back azimuthal correlations in Z+\mathrm{Z}+jet events at high transverse momentum in the TMD parton branching method at next-to-leading order” In Eur. Phys. J. C 82.8, 2022, pp. 755 DOI: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10715-0
  • [46] D. Amati et al. “A Treatment of Hard Processes Sensitive to the Infrared Structure of QCD” In Nucl. Phys. B173, 1980, pp. 429–455 DOI: 10.1016/0550-3213(80)90012-7
  • [47] A. Bassetto, M. Ciafaloni and G. Marchesini “Jet Structure and Infrared Sensitive Quantities in Perturbative QCD” In Phys. Rept. 100, 1983, pp. 201–272 DOI: 10.1016/0370-1573(83)90083-2
  • [48] N.. Abdulov “TMDlib2 and TMDplotter: a platform for 3D hadron structure studies” In Eur. Phys. J. C 81.8, 2021, pp. 752 DOI: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09508-8
  • [49] F. Hautmann et al. “TMDlib and TMDplotter: library and plotting tools for transverse-momentum-dependent parton distributions” In Eur. Phys. J. C74, 2014, pp. 3220 DOI: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-3220-9
  • [50] J. Alwall et al. “The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations” In JHEP 07, 2014, pp. 079 DOI: 10.1007/JHEP07(2014)079
  • [51] S. Baranov “CASCADE3 A Monte Carlo event generator based on TMDs” In Eur. Phys. J. C 81.5, 2021, pp. 425 DOI: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09203-8
  • [52] H. Jung “The CCFM Monte Carlo generator CASCADE version 2.2.03” In Eur. Phys. J. C 70, 2010, pp. 1237–1249 DOI: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-010-1507-z
  • [53] G. Corcella et al. “HERWIG 6.5 release note”, 2002 arXiv:hep-ph/0210213
  • [54] Gennaro Corcella et al. “HERWIG 6: an event generator for hadron emission reactions with interfering gluons (including supersymmetric processes)” In Journal of High Energy Physics 2001.01, 2001, pp. 010 DOI: 10.1088/1126-6708/2001/01/010
  • [55] Torbjorn Sjostrand, Stephen Mrenna and Peter Skands “PYTHIA 6.4 physics and manual” In Journal of High Energy Physics 2006.05, 2006, pp. 026 DOI: 10.1088/1126-6708/2006/05/026
  • [56] Georges Aad “Measurement of the transverse momentum and ϕη\phi^{*}_{\eta} distributions of Drell–Yan lepton pairs in proton–proton collisions at s=8\sqrt{s}=8 TeV with the ATLAS detector” In Eur. Phys. J. C 76.5, 2016, pp. 291 DOI: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4070-4
  • [57] R. Aaij “Precision measurement of forward ZZ boson production in proton-proton collisions at s=13\sqrt{s}=13 TeV” In JHEP 07, 2022, pp. 026 DOI: 10.1007/JHEP07(2022)026
  • [58] B. Abbott “Measurement of the inclusive differential cross section for ZZ bosons as a function of transverse momentum in p¯p\bar{p}p collisions at s=1.8\sqrt{s}=1.8 TeV” In Phys. Rev. D 61, 2000, pp. 032004 DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.61.032004
  • [59] T. Affolder “The transverse momentum and total cross section of e+ee^{+}e^{-} pairs in the ZZ boson region from pp¯p\bar{p} collisions at s=1.8\sqrt{s}=1.8 TeV” In Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 2000, pp. 845–850 DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.84.845
  • [60] T. Aaltonen “Transverse momentum cross section of e+ee^{+}e^{-} pairs in the ZZ-boson region from pp¯p\bar{p} collisions at s=1.96\sqrt{s}=1.96 TeV” In Phys. Rev. D 86, 2012, pp. 052010 DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.86.052010
  • [61] C. Aidala “Measurements of μμ\mu\mu pairs from open heavy flavor and Drell-Yan in p+pp+p collisions at s=200\sqrt{s}=200 GeV” In Phys. Rev. D 99.7, 2019, pp. 072003 DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.99.072003
  • [62] Albert M Sirunyan “Study of Drell-Yan dimuon production in proton-lead collisions at sNN=\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}= 8.16 TeV” In JHEP 05, 2021, pp. 182 DOI: 10.1007/JHEP05(2021)182
  • [63] G. Moreno “Dimuon Production in Proton - Copper Collisions at s\sqrt{s} = 38.8-GeV” In Phys. Rev. D 43, 1991, pp. 2815–2836 DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.43.2815
  • [64] H. Jung “The non-perturbative Sudakov Form Factor and the role of soft gluons” In 30th Cracow Epiphany Conference on on Precision Physics at High Energy Colliders: dedicated to the memory of Staszek Jadach, 2024 arXiv:2404.06905 [hep-ph]
  • [65] I. Bubanja et al. “Center-of-mass energy dependence of intrinsic-kTk_{T} distributions obtained from Drell-Yan production”, 2024 arXiv:2404.04088 [hep-ph]
  • [66] S. Monfared “Recent progress in transverse momentum dependent (TMD) Parton Densities and corresponding parton showers” In 31st International Workshop on Deep-Inelastic Scattering and Related Subjects, 2024 arXiv:2410.05853 [hep-ph]
  • [67] Natasa Raicevic “Non-Perturbative Contributions to Low Transverse Momentum Drell-Yan Pair Production Using the Parton Branching Method” In 13th International Conference on New Frontiers in Physics, 2024 arXiv:2412.00892 [hep-ph]