Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

A Signal strength parameter (interpretation)

  1. May 13, 2016 #1

    ChrisVer

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    How can in general the signal strength parameter ##\mu## be interpreted?

    I am talking for the parameter defined in Eq.1 here and plots like the Fig.1 here:
    http://arxiv.org/abs/1507.04548

    It says that it's the ratio of the i->H->f of the observed over what's expected by the SM... is the last the cross section prediction of the Higgs or for any other background?
    Then what would the <1 or >1 indicate? I think the >1 indicate a signal excess, while the <1 indicate a signal underestimation(????)
     
  2. jcsd
  3. May 13, 2016 #2

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    Only Higgs. The background in data is subtracted before μ is calculated.
    A deviation from the standard model. If μ=1 gets ruled out in some channel, things get interesting.
     
  4. May 15, 2016 #3

    ChrisVer

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Is that the case even if you have background overestimation compared to data?
     
  5. May 15, 2016 #4

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    I'm not sure if I understand your question. If you overestimate something, you are doing something wrong and should fix it, or not use what you cannot get right.
     
  6. May 15, 2016 #5

    ChrisVer

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Well it's not unusual to get overestimates like these [at <120 or 140GeV]:
    http://cms.web.cern.ch/sites/cms.we...ZMass_7Plus8TeV_70-180_3GeV.png?itok=k2MlxuLT
    In which case subtracting the estimates from data will result to negative values.
     
  7. May 15, 2016 #6

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    That is (hopefully) not an overestimate, just a statistical fluctuation. Yes, estimated signal strengths can be negative. As a random example, this ATLAS note has -0.4 +- 1.1 for VH -> Vbb in table 2. Note that it is consistent with 1, the uncertainties were just very large in 2012.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted



Similar Discussions: Signal strength parameter (interpretation)
  1. About Quench Parameter (Replies: 3)

  2. CKM matrix parameters (Replies: 11)

Loading...