UCN 2014-Shutdown Schedule UCN Monthly Meeting (July 24, 2013) L.Lee, C.Marshall.
Probing TeV scale physics in precision UCN decays Rajan Gupta Theoretical Division Los Alamos...
-
Upload
avice-murphy -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
1
Transcript of Probing TeV scale physics in precision UCN decays Rajan Gupta Theoretical Division Los Alamos...
Probing TeV scale physics in precision UCN decays
Rajan Gupta
Theoretical Division
Los Alamos National Lab
Lattice 2013 Mainz, 30 July 2013
Superconducting Spectrometer
Neutron Polarizing/Spin-flipper Magnet
1LAUR-12-20208
Theory and Experimental effort centered at LANL
• Tanmoy Bhattacharya (LANL)
• Vincenzo Cirigliano (LANL)
• Saul Cohen (U of Washington)
• Alberto Filipuzzi (Valencia, Spain)
• Martin Gonzalez-Alonso (Madison, Wisconsin)
• Michael Graesser (LANL)
• Rajan Gupta (LANL)
• Anosh Joseph (LANL)
• Huey-Wen Lin (U of Washington)
Theory and Lattice QCD Collaboration (PNDME)
2
PRD85:5 (2012) 054512 arXiv:1110.6448 arXiv:1306.5435
Precision calculations of gS, gT
using Lattice QCD
gT ~
gS ~
3
Goal: 10-20% accuracy
XBSM
T. Bhattacharya, S. Cohen, R. Gupta, H-W Lin, A. Joseph
Impact of reducing errors in gS and gT from 50→10%
4
|B1-b| < 10-3
|b| < 10-3
b0+ = 2.6 (4.3)∗10-3
Allowed region in [εS , εT ] (90% contours)
gT ~
gS ~
Expt. input
Limited by precision of ME
• Achieving 10-20% uncertainty is a realistic goal but requires:
– High Statistics: computer resources from USQCD, XSEDE, LANL
– Controlling all Systematic Errors:
• Finite volume effects
• Contamination from excited states
• Chiral Extrapolations to physical u and d quark masses
• Extrapolation to the continuum limit (lattice spacing a →→ 0)
• Non-perturbative renormalization of bilinears using the RIsmom scheme
Lattice QCD calculation of <p|u Γd|n>Oi
q
n p×
Isolate the neutron e-
Mnτ
Project on the proton e-
Mpτ
ud
uud d
5
Lattice setup: Choices we made• Gauge configurations with 2+1+1 flavor of dynamical quarks
– HISQ lattices generated by the MILC collaboration (short-term)
• Analysis using clover fermions (Clover on HISQ)
– Issue of exceptional Configurations – extensive tests
• Improving Signal in Baryon Correlators
– Large smearing of source used in matrix inversion (p = 0)
– HYP smearing of gauge configurations
• Study multiple time separations between the source (neutron) and sink (proton) to study & reduce excited state contribution
6
n p×tsep
Sequential propagators with
nucleon insertion at p=0
7
p pu
d
uO(p,t)
Initial inversion of Dirac operator with smeared source
Sequential inversion with (n,p) insertion at p=0
2+1+1 flavor HISQ lattices: goal 1000 configs
• ms set to its physical value using Mss
8
a(fm) ml/ms LatticeVolume
Mπ L Mπ (MeV) Configs. Analyzed
0.12 0.2 243 × 64 4.54 305 1013/1013
0.12 0.1 323 × 64 4.29 217 958/958
0.09 0.2 323 × 96 4.5 313 881/1000
0.09 0.1 483 × 96 4.73 220 890/1000
0.06 0.2 483 × 144 4.53 320 800/1000
0.06 0.1 643 × 144 4.28 229 0/1000
Issues in Analysis
9
Signal in 2-point baryon correlators
a = 0.12 fm lattices with Mπ = 310 MeV
(Total of 1013 Configurations, each with 4 sources)10
SS
: E
ffec
tive
Mas
s P
lot M
eff
507 Conf 506 Conf 1013 conf
2-point function → MN
11
Findings at a=0.12 fm with Mπ=310, 220 MeV
• Statistical analysis of ~1000 configurations and
as 2 subsets of ~500 configurations
– All three estimates consistent within 1–2 σ
– Errors of the 2 subsets ~√2 larger than the full set
– Variation in gΓ between 2 subsets ≈ Δt dependence
– Signal improves as a → 0
12
Need > 4x1000 configurations before tsep dependence, chiral and continuum extrapolations
can be resolved & estimated to give gS to 10%
Excited States
• Statistics & better interpolating operators
– Improve overlap with ground state of (p,n) operators
• Simulations at many Δt
– Needed to eliminate excited state contribution
13
n p×
n nΔt =tf - ti =tp - tn
Γ(t)
Signal in the ratio
14
The calculation of gS will dictate the statistics needed
One-state versus two-state fit
Scalar channel gS: Signal versus Δt, t
15
Δt = 8 9 10 11 12
Δt=10 (~1.2 fm) is the best compromise
1013 conf
Tensor channel gT: Signal versus Δt
16
Δt = 8 9 10 11 12
No significant Δt dependence
Reducing excited state contamination
Simultaneous fit to all Δt =tf - ti
17
Assuming 1 excited state, the 3-point function behaves as
Where M0 and M1 are the masses of the ground & excited state and A0 and A1 are the corresponding amplitudes.
n p×
ti t tf
Simultaneous fit to all Δt
18
Δt=8 Δt=10 Δt=12
Data for gS on the Mπ=220 MeV ensemble at a=0.12fm
Term
Excluding
Simultaneous fit to all Δt
19
Δt=10 Δt=12 Δt=14
Data for gS on the Mπ=220 MeV ensemble at a=0.09fm
Term
Excluding
Uncertainty in the chiral extrapolation
20
Do chiral logs dominate at lower Mπ
2 ?
What Mπ2
interval should be used in the extrapolation?
Reducing uncertainty in the chiral extrapolation
21
Ongoing simulations
Renormalization of bilinear operators
• Non-perturbative renormalization ZΓ
using the RI-sMOM scheme
– Need quark propagator
in momentum space
• Results
– 101 lattices at a=0.12 fm Mπ=310
– 60 lattices at a=0.12 fm Mπ=220
22
×
Γ
> >
ZA
23
Mπ = 310 MeV 220 MeV
ZS (in MS scheme at 2 GeV )
24
Mπ = 310 MeV 220 MeV
ZT (in MS scheme at 2 GeV)
25
Mπ = 310 MeV 220 MeV
Renormalization constants ZΓ • Largest uncertainty:
– O(a) errors due to full rotational symmetry → cubic symmetry
– Examine p4 versus (p2)2 behavior
• Data show (~0.05) variation at fixed p2
• ZA, ZS and ZT are all between 0.95–1.0 with < 1% error
– HYP smearing brings the ZΓ close to unity
• ZΓ → 1 as a → 0
26
ResultsPNDME Collaboration
• gA = 1.214(40)
• gS = 0.66(24)
• gT = 1.094(48)
LHPC
• gA = 1.0-1.2
• gS = 1.08(28)(16)
• gT = 1.038(11)(12)
27
gS and gT
28
Continuum extrapolation
• Need estimates at a = 0.12, 0.09, 0.06 fm
to perform a continuum extrapolation of
renormalized charges (gR = gbare × Z)
• Will need >1000 configurations at a=0.12, 0.09
and 0.06 fm to quantify if gS and gT have
significant a dependence and get estimates with
10% uncertainty
29
Summary
• GOAL: To use experimental measurements of b and b-bν
at the 10-3 level to bound εS and εT requires calculation of
gT and gS at the 10-20% level
• 2011: Lattice QCD estimates of gS and gT improved the
bounds on εS and εT compared to previous estimates based
on phenomenological models
• 2013: Lattice calculations are on track to providing
gT and gS with 10-20% uncertainty
30
β-decay versus
LHC constraints
31
LHC @ 14TeV and 300fb-1, will provide comparable constraints to low-energy ones with δgS/gS ~15%
Acknowledgements
• Computing resources from
– USQCD
– XSEDE
– LANL
• 2+1+1 HISQ lattices generated by the MILC
collaboration
• Computer code uses CHROMA library
• Supported by DOE and LANL-LDRD
32