Hard Diffraction at D During Run I.pptVIP

Michael Strang Lishep02, Feb 5, 2002, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Hard Diffraction at D? During Run I Michael Strang D? Collaboration / Fermilab University of Texas, Arlington D? Detector Particle Multiplicity Distributions Measuring CSE Hard Color Singlet Studies Data Selection Measurement of fs 630 vs. 1800 Multiplicities Color Singlet Models Model Fits to Data Fit Results Survival Probability Hard Color Singlet Conclusions Modifications to Theory BFKL: Cox, Forshaw (manhep99-7) use a non-running as to flatten the falling ET prediction of BFKL (due to higher order corrections at non-zero t) Soft Color: Gregores subsequently performed a more careful counting of states that produce color singlets to improve prediction. Hard Single Diffraction Studies Data Selection Event Characteristics 630 vs. 1800 Multiplicities Fitting Method Single Diffractive Results Comparison to MC Pomeron Structure Fits Demand data fractions composed of linear combination of hard and soft gluons, let overall ? s normalization and fraction of hard and soft at each energy be free parameters If we have a ? s independent normalization then the data prefer : 1800: hard gluon 0.18±0.05(stat)+0.04-0.03(syst) 630: hard gluon 0.39±0.04(stat)+0.02-0.01(syst) Normalization: 0.43±0.03(stat)+0.08-0.06(syst) with a confidence level of 56%. If the hard to soft ratio is constrained the data prefer: Hard gluon: 0.30±0.04(stat)+0.01-0.01(syst) Norm. 1800: 0.38±0.03(stat)+0.03-0.02(syst) Norm. 630: 0.50±0.04(stat)+0.02-0.02(syst) with a confidence level of 1.9%. To significantly constrain quark fraction requires additional experimental measurements. CDF determined 56% hard gluon, 44% quark but this does not describe our data without significant soft gluon or 100% quark at 630 x Calculation Single Diffractive x Distributions Summary Measurements at both CM energies with same detector adds critical new information for examining pomeron puzzle The higher rates at 630 were not widely predicted before the measur