No abstract

We investigate an excess observed in hadronic events in the archived LEP2 ALEPH data. This excess was observed at preselection level during data-MC comparisons of four-jet events when no search was being performed. The events are clustered into four jets and paired such that the mass difference between the two dijet systems is minimized. The excess occurs in the region M 1 + M 2 ∼ 110 GeV; about half of the excess is concentrated in the region M 1 ∼ 80 GeV, M 2 ∼ 25 GeV, with a local significance between 4.7σ and 5.5σ, depending on assumptions about hadronization uncertainties. The other half of the events are in a broad excess near M 1 ∼ M 2 ∼ 55 GeV; these display a local significance of 4.1 − 4.5σ. We investigate the effects of changing the SM QCD Monte Carlo sample, the jet-clustering algorithm, and the jet rescaling method. We find that the excess is remarkably robust under these changes, and we find no source of systematic uncertainty that can explain the excess. No analogue of the excess is seen at LEP1. than either of the masses measured separately; such a plot also displays a nice separation of QCD and W + W − events, useful for data-MC comparisons.Unlike what was typical during the LEP era, we plotted M 1 + M 2 using the entire ALEPH LEP2 data sample (∼ 735pb −1 ) simultaneously; with our very loose cuts, this amounts to O(17, 000) events. In doing so, we noticed an excess of about 200 events (∼ 3σ) in the dijet mass sum in the region M 1 + M 2 ∼ 110 GeV. Interestingly, this is the same region in which ALEPH observed an excess in the search for hA final states [2] with a much smaller dataset (5.7pb −1 ) and after analysis cuts; the excess was later dismissed as a statistical fluctuation [3] 3 . This excess brought with it a set of unusual challenges. The first of these is that we had no model on which to base selection cuts for an analysis. Second, as this excess was found during data-MC comparisons at preselection level when no search was being conducted, we had to develop the machinery of the analysis after knowing of the excess; the analysis is unavoidably unblind.Were the experiment still running, a simple solution to these challenges would be to explore the features of the excess region, design a set of cuts which efficiently selects the excess, and then see if such cuts also yield an excess in future data. Unfortunately, this is not possible in our case. However, there are three additional LEP data sets which could potentially be used to confirm or refute our findings. With this in mind, we follow the philosophy of Ref.[2] and set about cataloging the features in the excess region to develop analyses which can be used by the three other LEP experiments. In this paper, we will concentrate on establishing the location of the excess, its significance, and its dependence upon MC samples, jet-clustering algorithm, etc. We will reserve further details, including distributions of many observables in the excess region, for future work.At the time that we initially noticed the excess near M 1 + M 2 ∼ 110 G...