2017
DOI: 10.1103/physrevaccelbeams.20.081003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Large Hadron Collider momentum calibration and accuracy

Abstract: As a result of the excellent quality of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) experimental detectors and the accurate calibration of the luminosity at the LHC, uncertainties on the LHC beam energy may contribute significantly to the measurement errors on certain observables unless the relative uncertainty is well below 1%. Direct measurements of the beam energy using the revolution frequency difference of proton and lead beams combined with the magnetic model errors are used to provide the energy uncertainty of the … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
32
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Only events recorded with stable beams and the detector operating well are selected. The relative uncertainty of the LHC proton beam energy of ±0.1% [23] has no significant effect on the results.Events from Monte Carlo (MC) simulations, including simulation of the ATLAS detector, are used for the background estimation and to correct the measured data for detector acceptance, efficiency, and resolution effects.The W → µν signal process was simulated using Powheg-Box [24,25] at next-to-leading order (NLO) in perturbative QCD using the CT10 set of PDFs [26] and interfaced to Pythia 8.170 [27] with the AU2 set of tuned parameters [28] to simulate the parton shower, hadronisation, and underlying event and to Photos [29] to simulate final-state photon radiation (FSR). This is referred to as Powheg+Pythia8 in this paper.…”
mentioning
confidence: 86%
“…Only events recorded with stable beams and the detector operating well are selected. The relative uncertainty of the LHC proton beam energy of ±0.1% [23] has no significant effect on the results.Events from Monte Carlo (MC) simulations, including simulation of the ATLAS detector, are used for the background estimation and to correct the measured data for detector acceptance, efficiency, and resolution effects.The W → µν signal process was simulated using Powheg-Box [24,25] at next-to-leading order (NLO) in perturbative QCD using the CT10 set of PDFs [26] and interfaced to Pythia 8.170 [27] with the AU2 set of tuned parameters [28] to simulate the parton shower, hadronisation, and underlying event and to Photos [29] to simulate final-state photon radiation (FSR). This is referred to as Powheg+Pythia8 in this paper.…”
mentioning
confidence: 86%
“…Beam energy: The LHC beam energy during the 2012 pp run was determined to be within 0.1 % of the nominal value of 4 TeV per beam, based on the LHC magnetic model together with measurements of the revolution frequency difference of proton and lead-ion beams [91]. Following the approach used in Ref.…”
Section: Luminosity and Beam Energymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The systematic uncertainties in the theoretical tt cross section are associated with the choice of the renormalization (µ R ) and factorization (µ F ) scales-nominally set at µ R = µ F = √ m 2 top + p 2 T,top with p T,top the top quark transverse momentum-as well as with the PDF set and the α s value. The uncertainty of 0.1% in the LHC beam energy [35] translates into an additional uncertainty of 0.22 pb in the expected cross section, with negligible impact on the acceptance of any of the channels included in this analysis.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%