Changes between Version 11 and Version 12 of ThreeSiteModel


Ignore:
Timestamp:
03/03/10 22:16:05 (10 years ago)
Author:
NeilChristensen
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • ThreeSiteModel

    v11 v12  
    2424=== Instructions ===
    2525
    26 The 3-Site Model is implemented in both Feynman and unitary gauge. A switch ' {{{FeynmanGauge}}} ' has been created. To switch between the two simply set {{{FeynmanGauge }}} True/False= inside your Mathematica notebook after loading the model but before doing any calculations with it (finding vertices for example.) {{{FeynmanGauge}}} is set to {{{False}}} by default.
     26The 3-Site Model is implemented in both Feynman and unitary gauge. A switch ' {{{FeynmanGauge}}} ' has been created. To switch between the two simply set {{{FeynmanGauge = True/False }}} inside your Mathematica notebook after loading the model but before doing any calculations with it (finding vertices for example.) {{{FeynmanGauge}}} is set to {{{False}}} by default.
    2727=== Examples ===
    2828
    2929We provide a basic notebook giving examples of how to run the interfaces on this model:
    30    * [attachment:Example-v1.0.nb.tgz Example-v1.0.nb.tgz]
     30   * [/raw-attachment/wiki/ThreeSiteModel/Example-v1.0.nb.tar.gz Example-v1.0.nb.tar.gz]
    3131=== Interfaces ===
    3232
     
    3838=== Validation ===
    3939
    40 Over 200 2→2 processes were run in a variety of ways. First, each process was compared between the original !LanHEP implementation and the current !FeynRules implementation. Second, each process was run across multiple monte-carlos including !CalcHEP, !CompHEP, !MadGraph and Sherpa. Third, each process was run in two different gauges, namely Feynman gauge (in !CalcHEP and !CompHEP) and in unitary gauge (in !CalcHEP, !MadGraph and Sherpa). The cross section was computed for each process and compared to one another. Agreement to better than 1% was found for all processes. The parameters for these calculations were taken as in the model files above. The energies and cuts for these calculations were:
     40Over 200 2->2 processes were run in a variety of ways. First, each process was compared between the original !LanHEP implementation and the current !FeynRules implementation. Second, each process was run across multiple monte-carlos including !CalcHEP, !CompHEP, !MadGraph and Sherpa. Third, each process was run in two different gauges, namely Feynman gauge (in !CalcHEP and !CompHEP) and in unitary gauge (in !CalcHEP, !MadGraph and Sherpa). The cross section was computed for each process and compared to one another. Agreement to better than 1% was found for all processes. The parameters for these calculations were taken as in the model files above. The energies and cuts for these calculations were:
     41||'''Particles involved'''||'''sqrt(s)'''||'''p_T'''||
     42||Only SM||600GeV||20GeV||
     43||W',Z'||1200GeV||200GeV||
     44||Heavy Fermion Partners||10TeV||2TeV||
    4145
    42 <table align="center" border="0"><thead><tr><td align="left" valign="middle" style="width: 200px"> '''Particles involved''' </td><td align="center" valign="middle" style="width: 100px"><strong>&radic;s <br /></strong></td><td align="center" valign="middle" style="width: 100px"><strong>p<sub>T</sub>> <br /></strong></td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left" valign="middle">Only SM<br /></td><td align="center" valign="middle">600GeV </td><td align="center" valign="middle">20GeV <br /></td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="middle">W',Z' <br /></td><td align="center" valign="middle">1200GeV <br /></td><td align="center" valign="middle">200GeV <br /></td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="middle"> Heavy Fermion Partners </td><td align="center" valign="middle">10TeV <br /></td><td align="center" valign="middle">2TeV <br /></td></tr></tbody></table>
    43 
    44 where "Particles" refers to what particles are involved in the process. The results of these validations can be seen in the following images: <table align="center" border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" style="width: 200px">[attachment:CS-strong.jpg Strong Processes] <br /></td><td align="center" valign="middle" style="width: 200px">[attachment:CS-ffAW.jpg ff&rarr;AW Processes] <br /></td><td align="center" valign="middle" style="width: 200px">
     46where "Particles" refers to what particles are involved in the process. The results of these validations can be seen in the following images:
     47{{{
     48#!html
     49<table align="center" border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" style="width: 200px">[attachment:CS-strong.jpg Strong Processes] <br /></td><td align="center" valign="middle" style="width: 200px">[attachment:CS-ffAW.jpg ff&rarr;AW Processes] <br /></td><td align="center" valign="middle" style="width: 200px">
    4550
    4651[attachment:CS-llll.jpg ll&rarr;ll Processes]
     
    5257[attachment:CS-VVVV-neutral.jpg Neutral VV&rarr;VV Processes]
    5358</td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table>
     59}}}
    5460
    55 Each of these processes was also run at a single phase space point of the squared amplitude. In this test, only !CalcHEP in Feynman and unitary gauge and !MadGraph were used. It is planned to include Sherpa at a later date. The energies were chosen as in the cross section comparison. The angle was chosen to be 73.3 degrees. Agreement to better than 0.1% was found in all cases. Here are images of the results: <table align="center" border="0">
     61Each of these processes was also run at a single phase space point of the squared amplitude. In this test, only !CalcHEP in Feynman and unitary gauge and !MadGraph were used. It is planned to include Sherpa at a later date. The energies were chosen as in the cross section comparison. The angle was chosen to be 73.3 degrees. Agreement to better than 0.1% was found in all cases. Here are images of the results:
     62
     63{{{
     64#!html
     65<table align="center" border="0">
    5666
    5767<tbody><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" style="width: 200px">[attachment:PS-strong.jpg Strong Processes] <br /></td><td align="center" valign="middle" style="width: 200px">[attachment:PS-ffAW.jpg ff&rarr;AW Processes] <br /></td><td align="center" valign="middle" style="width: 200px">
     
    7080
    7181</table>
     82}}}
    7283
    73 These tests were performed with the following versions of the software: <table align="center" border="0"><thead><tr><td> '''Software''' </td><td> '''Version''' </td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>!Mathematica</td><td>7.0.0 <br /></td></tr><tr><td>!FeynRules <br /></td><td>1.4.0 <br /></td></tr><tr><td>!CalcHEP <br /></td><td>2.5.3 <br /></td></tr><tr><td>!CompHEP</td><td>4.4.104 <br /></td></tr><tr><td>!MadGraph </td><td>4.4.21 <br /></td></tr><tr><td>!Sherpa <br /></td><td>Private development version <br /></td></tr></tbody></table>
     84These tests were performed with the following versions of the software:
     85{{{
     86#!html
     87<table align="center" border="0"><thead><tr><td> '''Software''' </td><td> '''Version''' </td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>!Mathematica</td><td>7.0.0 <br /></td></tr><tr><td>!FeynRules <br /></td><td>1.4.0 <br /></td></tr><tr><td>!CalcHEP <br /></td><td>2.5.3 <br /></td></tr><tr><td>!CompHEP</td><td>4.4.104 <br /></td></tr><tr><td>!MadGraph </td><td>4.4.21 <br /></td></tr><tr><td>!Sherpa <br /></td><td>Private development version <br /></td></tr></tbody></table>
     88}}}
    7489
    7590
     
    106121
    107122
    108