PVDIS at 11 GeV
•
•
•
•
DIS Parity Asymmetry
Uses the “SOLID” Spectrometer
Spokesperson: Paul Souder (provided many slides)
Simulations: Eugene Chudakov
• Engineering: P. Reimer and ANL
Also: P. Bosted, S. Brodsky, K. Kumar, J.T. Londergan,
W. Melnitchouk, Z. Meziani, R. Michaels,
M. Ramsey-Musolf, K. Paschke, M. Pitt, X. Zheng
Hall A Collab. Mtg.
June 2010
R. Michaels
Physics of PVDIS
•
Search for Physics Beyond the Standard EW Model
Unique sensitivity to axial hadronic weak neutral currents.
•
Search for parton-level CSV
Might help explain NuTeV anomaly
•
Precise Measurement of d/u ratio in proton
No nuclear corrections
•
Study Higher-Twist Effects.
Novel hadronic effects like quark-quark correlations
How ?
Wide range of kinematics covered.
Global fit to unfold the effects.
Hall A Collab. Mtg.
June 2010
R. Michaels
PVDIS: Electron-Quark Scattering
A
V
V
A
Moller PV is insensitive to the Cij
PV elastic e-p scattering, APV
C1u and C1d will be determined to high precision by Qweak, APV Cs
p
Qweak
 2C1u  C1d 1 4 sin 2  W
PV deep inelastic scattering
C2u and C2d are small and poorly known:


one combination can be accessed in PV DIS
New physics such as compositeness, leptoquarks:
Deviations to C2u and C2d might be fractionally large
Hall A Collab. Mtg.
June 2010
R. Michaels
Deep Inelastic Scattering
eZ*
APV
X
x  x Bjorken
*
N
GF Q 2

a(x)  Y (y) b(x)

2
e-
 C Q f (x)
a(x) =
 Q f (x)
+
1i
y 1 E / E
fi   fi  f i
i
2 +
i i
i

For an isoscalar target like 2H, structure
 in the ratio at high x
functions largely cancel
At high x, APV becomes independent of x, W,
with well-defined SM prediction for Q2 and y
New combination of:
Vector quark couplings C1q
Also axial quark couplings C2q
i i

a(x) and b(x)
contain quark
distribution functions
fi(x)
 C Q f (x)
b(x) 
 Q f (x)

2i
i
2 
i i
i
at high x
 0.62s  
3
a(x)  (2C1u  C1d )  1  
10
u  d  

0
3
 u v  dv 
b(x)  (2C2u  C2d ) 




10
u d
1
Sensitive to new physics at the TeV scale
PVDIS: Only way to measure C2q
Hall A Collab. Mtg.
June 2010
i
i
R. Michaels
Higher Twist Coefficients in parity
conserving (Di) and nonconserving
(Ci) Scattering
F2 ( x, Q 2 )  F2 ( x, Q 2 ) DGLAP (1  D( x) / Q 2 )
Evolves according
To DGLAP equations
Higher Twist is
what is left over
APV (x,Q2 )  APV (x)(1 C(x) /Q2 )

Hall A Collab. Mtg.
June 2010
(Does not
Evolve)
Higher Twist is any
Q2-dependent deviation
From the SM prediction
R. Michaels
A New Design for Precision PV DIS Physics Over a
Broad Kinematic Range
•
•
High Luminosity on LH2 & LD2
Better than 1% errors for small bins
• x-range 0.25-0.75
• W2 > 4 GeV2
• Q2 range a factor of 2 for each x
•
– (Except x~0.75)
Moderate running times
• Solenoid (from BaBar, CDF or CLEOII )
contains low energy backgrounds (Moller, pions, etc)
trajectories measured after baffles
• Fast tracking, particle ID, calorimetry, and pipeline electronics
• Precision polarimetry (0.4%)
Hall A Collab. Mtg.
June 2010
R. Michaels
SoLID Spectrometer
Gas Cerenkov
Shashlyk
Hall A Collab. Mtg.
June 2010
Baffles
GEM’s
R. Michaels
SOLID Spectrometer
using CDF coil
Lead Baffles
Hall A Collab. Mtg.
June 2010
R. Michaels
Kinematics at large x
E/
GeV
Hall A Collab. Mtg.
June 2010
R. Michaels
Simulation by Eugene Chudakov
Errors (%) for APV for bins in Q2 and X. Total 120 days
at 11 GeV and 60 days at 6.6 GeV
Hall A Collab. Mtg.
June 2010
for 50 uA and pe = 0.85.
R. Michaels
Hall A Collab. Mtg.
June 2010
R. Michaels
11 GeV PVDIS
6 GeV PVDIS
Qweak
LPV 
GF
[ e    5 e (C1u u   u  C1d d   d )  e   e (C2u u    5 u  C2 d d    5 d ) ]
2
Hall A Collab. Mtg.
June 2010
R. Michaels
P. Bosted, J. P. Chen,
E. Chudakov, A. Deur,
O. Hansen, C. W. de Jager,
D. Gaskell, J. Gomez,
D. Higinbotham, J. LeRose,
R. Michaels, S. Nanda,
A. Saha, V. Sulkosky,
B. Wojtsekhowski
Collaboration
L. El Fassi, R. Gilman,
R. Ransome, E. Schulte
Rutgers
Louisiana Tech
W. Chen, H. Gao, X. Qian,
Y. Qiang, Q. Ye
Los Alamos
O. Glamazdin, R. Pomatsalyuk
Duke University
University of Kentucky
K. A. Aniol
Jefferson Lab
Syracuse University
INFN, Sezione di
Roma
G. M. Urciuoli
P. A. Souder, R. Holmesspokesperson
U. Massachusetts
H. Baghdasaryan, G. D. Cates,
D. Crabb, M. Dalton, D. Day,
N. Kalantarians, N. Liyanage,
V. V. Nelyubin, B. Norum,
K. Paschke, S. Riordan,
O. A. Rondon, M. Shabestari,
J. Singh, A. Tobias, K. Wang,
X. Zheng
University of Virginia
J. Arrington, K. Hafidi,
P. E. Reimer, P. Solvignon
Argonne
D. Armstrong, T. Averett,
J. M. Finn
William and Mary
P. Decowski
Hall A Collab. Mtg.
Smith College
June 2010
Florida International
K. Grimm, K. Johnston,
N. Simicevic, S. Wells
X. Jiang
California State
K. Kumar, D. McNulty,
L. Mercado, R. Miskimen
P. Markowitz
A. Lukhanin, Z. E. Meziani,
B. Sawatzky
Temple University
P. M. King, J. Roche
Ohio University
E. Beise
University of Maryland
W. Bertozzi, S. Gilad,
W. Deconinck, S. Kowalski,
B. Moffit
MIT
Benmokhtar, G. Franklin,
B. Quinn
Carnegie Mellon
G. Ron
Tel Aviv University
T. Holmstrom
Longwood University
W. Korsch
J. Erler
Universidad Autonoma
de Mexico
M. J. Ramsey-Musolf
University of Wisconsin
NSC Kharkov Institute
for Physics and
Technology
Z. G. Xiao
Tsinghua University
B.-Q. Ma, Y. J. Mao
Beijing University
C. Keppel
X. M. Li, J. Luan, S. Zhou
Hampton University
China Institute of
Atomic Energy
H. Lu, X. Yan, Y. Ye, P. Zhu
University of Science
and Technology of
China
N. Morgan, M. Pitt
Virginia Tech
J.-C. Peng
University of Illinois
H. P. Cheng, R. C. Liu,
H. J. Lu, Y. Shi
Huangshan University
S. Choi, Ho. Kang, Hy. Kang B.
Lee, Y. Oh
Seoul National
University
J. Dunne, D. Dutta
Mississippi State
B. T. Hu, Y. W. Zhang,
Y. Zhang
Lanzhou University
C. M. Camacho, E. Fuchey,
C. Hyde, F. Itard
LPC Clermont,
Université Blaise
Pascal
A. Deshpande
SUNY Stony Brook
A. T. Katramatou,
G. G. Petratos
Kent State University
J. W. Martin
R. Michaels
University
of Winnipeg