Status and Developments of Event Generators

(1)

Status and Developments of Event Generators

Torbj¨ orn Sj¨ ostrand

Theoretical Particle Physics

Department of Astronomy and Theoretical Physics Lund University

S¨olvegatan 14A, 223 62 Lund

LHCP 2016, Lund, 13 June 2016

(2)

1976: Lund QCD Phenomenology group

Created by Bo Andersson and G¨osta Gustafson

space time

quark antiquark pair creation

Lund string model: ∼ like rubber band that is pulled apart and breaks into pieces, or like a magnet broken into smaller pieces.

Complete, consistent description of 2-jet events

— but not necessarily perfect.

Torbj¨orn Sj¨ostrand Status and Developments of Event Generators slide 3/28

(4)

1978: JETSET version 1

≈ 200 punched cards Fortran code

(5)

1980: string (colour coherence) effect

quark

antiquark gluon

string motion in the event plane (without breakups)

Predicted unique event structure; inside & between jets.

Confirmed first by JADE 1980. Generator crucial

to sell physics!

(today: PS, M&M, MPI, . . . )

(6)

1980: string (colour coherence) effect

quark

antiquark gluon

string motion in the event plane (without breakups)

Predicted unique event structure;

inside & between jets.

Confirmed first by JADE 1980.

Generator crucial to sell physics!

(today: PS, M&M, MPI, . . . )

(7)

Lund contributions

Physics:

string fragmentation (& colour coherence) dipole showers

backwards evolution (for ISR) multiparton interactions(MPI) colour reconnection (CR) matching (POWHEG style)

& merging (CKKW-L, . . . ) small-x evolution (CCFM, . . . ) interleaved evolution

heavy-ion collisions QCD effects for BSM

Generators:

JETSET PYTHIA Fritiof Ariadne LDC DIPSY Lepto VINCIA DIRE RapGap HIJING

· · · GEANT

(8)

The workhorses

Herwig, PYTHIA and Sherpa offer convenient frameworks for LHC physics studies, covering all aspects above, but with slightly different history/emphasis:

PYTHIA (successor to JETSET, begun in 1978):

originated in hadronization studies, still special interest in soft physics.

Herwig (successor to EARWIG, begun in 1984):

originated in coherent showers (angular ordering), cluster hadronization as simple complement.

Sherpa (APACIC++/AMEGIC++, begun in 2000):

had own matrix-element calculator/generator originated with matching & merging issues.

(9)

The structure of an event

All full-fledged generators need to address many issues:

(10)

MCnet

Herwig PYTHIA Sherpa MadGraph Plugin:

Ariadne DIPSY HEJ CEDAR:

Rivet Professor HepForge LHAPDF HepMC

EU-funded 2007–10, 2013–16, 2017–20 Generator development Services to community PhD student training Common activities

Short-term studentships (3 - 6 months).

Experimentalists welcome! Summer schools

2016: DESY (w. CTEQ) 2017: Lund, 3 - 7 July

Send your students!

Nodes:

Manchester CERN Durham Glasgow G¨ottingen Heidelberg Karlsruhe UC London Louvain Lund

Monash (Au) SLAC (US)

(11)

MCnet

Herwig PYTHIA Sherpa MadGraph Plugin:

Ariadne DIPSY HEJ CEDAR:

Rivet Professor HepForge LHAPDF HepMC

EU-funded 2007–10, 2013–16, 2017–20 Generator development Services to community PhD student training Common activities Short-term studentships (3 - 6 months).

Experimentalists welcome!

Summer schools

2016: DESY (w. CTEQ) 2017: Lund, 3 - 7 July

Send your students!

Nodes:

Manchester CERN Durham Glasgow G¨ottingen Heidelberg Karlsruhe UC London Louvain Lund

Monash (Au) SLAC (US)

(12)

Herwig 7.0 news

Herwig++ 3.0⇒ Herwig 7.0 (December 2015).

Concludes 16 years effort to replace Fortran Herwig 6.

NLO matched to parton showers default for hard process.

Fully automated: no external codes to run, no intermediate event files.

Choice of subtractive (MC@NLO type) or multiplicative (PowHeg type) matching.

Two showers: angular ordered or dipole.

Spin correlations and QED radiation in the former. Facilities for parton-shower uncertainties.

New tunes, including MB/UE.

Vastly improved documentation, usage and installation. Several parallelization options.

(13)

Matchbox in Herwig 7

Herwig 7.0 – Under the Hood

Matchbox MadGraph

ColorFull

GoSam NJet OpenLoops

VBFNLO HJets++

CVolver Recola

QTildeShower DipoleShower

Cluster Hadronization

Decays Eikonal MPI Matching subtractions

ME corrections

Built-in ME BSM & UFO

Simon Pl¨atzer (IP³Durham & Manchester) Status of Herwig 7 4 / 13

script downloads & sets up external libraries (above + more) (figure by S. Pl¨atzer)

(14)

Herwig 7.0 news

Herwig++ 3.0⇒ Herwig 7.0 (December 2015).

Concludes 16 years effort to replace Fortran Herwig 6.

NLO matched to parton showers default for hard process.

Fully automated: no external codes to run, no intermediate event files.

Choice of subtractive (MC@NLO type) or multiplicative (PowHeg type) matching.

Two showers: angular ordered or dipole.

Spin correlations and QED radiation in the former.

Facilities for parton-shower uncertainties.

New tunes, including MB/UE.

Vastly improved documentation, usage and installation.

Several parallelization options.

(15)

Herwig 7 examples

Herwig 7.0 – Few Examples

Herwig 7

MadGraph / ColorFull / OpenLoops

ALEPH Data Herwig++ 2.7 LO ⌦ PS LO ⌦ PS NLO PS NLO ⌦ PS NLO Dipoles 10²

10¹ 1 10¹

1-Thrust, 1 T (charged)

1/NdN/d(1T)

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4

0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

1 T

MC/Data

Herwig 7

ALEPH Data Herwig++ 2.7 LO ⌦ PS LO ⌦ PS QCD ⌦ QED ⌦ PS

NLO PS

10³ 10² 10¹ 1 10¹ 10²

10³Photon Fragmentation in 3-jet events with ycut=0.1

1/sds(3jet)/dz⇥103

0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1.0

-3 s -2 s -1 s0 s1 s2 s3 s

zg

(MCdata)

Herwig 7.0 at LEP – new tune available with the release.

Several improvements to angular ordered shower.

Tons of plots using all combinations at: https://herwig.hepforge.org/plots/herwig7.0/

Herwig 7.0 – Few Examples

Herwig 7

CMS Data

LO PS

NLO PS

NLO ⌦ PS NLO Dipoles

10 ⁴ 10 ³ 10 ² 10 ¹ 1

Df(Z, J1),ps = 7 TeV

1 sds df

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

Df(Z, J1) [rad]

MC/Data

Herwig 7

ATLAS Data Herwig++ 2.7 LO ⌦ PS

LO PS

NLO PS

NLO ⌦ PS

0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1.0

Gap fraction vs. Qsumfor veto region: |y| < 2.1 fgap

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

0.96 0.98 1.0 1.02 1.04

Qsum[GeV]

MC/Data

Z+jet events from CMS and top pairs from ATLAS.

Matchbox using MadGraph, ColorFull and OpenLoops.

Tons of plots using all combinations at: https://herwig.hepforge.org/plots/herwig7.0/

LO→ NLO ⇒ major improvements in e⁺e⁻ and pp alike.

Subtractive or multiplicative matching less important.

Ditto angular-ordered or dipole shower.

(16)

Future of Herwig 7

Herwig 7.1 later this year:

NLO multijet merging (unitarized merging ideas).

Loop-induced processes.

Extended UFO-model support.

Extended reweighting: weight vectors in HepMC files.

Improved top decay in dipole shower.

Interface to HEJ.

Soft interactions and diffraction.

In the longer run:

Code now 500k lines ⇒ need for significant restructuring.

Amplitude-based parton showers.

(17)

Sherpa 2.2 news and activities

Sherpa NNLO QCD with parton showers New: NNLO QCD with parton showers

W production @ NNLO+PS with SHERPA +BLACKHAT

[H¨oche et al. arXiv:1507.05325]

SherpaMC

p^jet_?>20 GeV

ATLAS data arXiv:1201.1276 UN²LOPS mln/2 < µ_R/F<2 m_ln mln/2 < µQ<2 mln

10¹ 10² 10³

10⁴Inclusive Jet Multiplicity

s(W+Njetjets)[pb]

0 1 2 3 4 5

0 0.5 1 1.5 2

Njet

MC/Data

,! fully di↵erential hadron-level NNLO+PS simulation inclusive (born-like) distribution NNLO accurate

0-jet bin NNLO, 1-jet bin NLO, 2-jet bin LO, 3-jets shower accuracy ,! small corrections away from Born kinematics

(19)

Sherpa 2.2 news and activities

Sherpa QCD coherence test

Study events with two hard and one further softer third jets.

Angular distribution of third around second probes colour coherence:

Pheno: QCD color coherence

Coherence e↵ects in 3-jet events (CMS)[Chatrchyan et al. Eur. Phys. J. C 74 (2014) 2901]

presented comparison to shower MCs PYTHIA6 & 8, HERWIG++ 2.3 2! 2, 3jet LO merging from MADGRAPH+ PYTHIA6

; sizeable deviations observed

; H^ERWIGyields best modelling

; LO merging somewhat improves pure P^YTHIA6, but di↵erent tune used

; switching o↵ coherence in PYTHIA6 shower worsens agreement

β

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

)β(2ηF

0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08

Data PYTHIA6 Z2 PYTHIA8 4C HERWIG++ 2.3 MADGRAPH + PYTHIA6 D6T Systematic uncertainty

≤ 0.8 2|

|η

= 7 TeV -1 s CMS, L = 36 pb

β

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08

Data PYTHIA6 Z2 PYTHIA8 4C HERWIG++ 2.3 MADGRAPH + PYTHIA6 D6T Systematic uncertainty

≤ 2.5 2| 0.8 < |η

= 7 TeV -1 s CMS, L = 36 pb

β

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

MC/Data

0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2

PYTHIA6 Z2 PYTHIA8 4C HERWIG++ 2.3 MADGRAPH + PYTHIA6 D6T Statistical uncertainty Systematic uncertainty Stat.+ Sys. uncertainty

≤ 0.8 2|

|η

= 7 TeV -1 s CMS, L = 36 pb

β

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2

PYTHIA6 Z2 PYTHIA8 4C HERWIG++ 2.3 MADGRAPH + PYTHIA6 D6T Statistical uncertainty Systematic uncertainty Stat.+ Sys. uncertainty = 7 TeV -1 s

CMS, L = 36 pb

≤ 2.5 2| 0.8 < |η

⌘₂ central ⌘₂forward

Pheno: QCD color coherence

Coherence e↵ects in 3-jet events analysis meanwhile available in RIVET

comparison against SHERPAdipole shower and 2! 2, 3, 4jets M^EPS@LO

default hadronisation & underlying event tune

; yields satisfactory agreement with data

CMS data Sherpa-2.1.1 (shower) Sherpa-2.1.1 (MEPS@LO)

0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08

CMS,ps= 7 TeV, central jet 2–3 correlation,|h2| < 0.8 Fh2(b)

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

0.70.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2

b

MC/Data

CMS data Sherpa-2.1.1 (shower)

=Sherpa-2.1.1 (MEPS@LO)

0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08

CMS,ps= 7 TeV, jet 2–3 correlation, 0.8 <|h2| < 2.5 Fh2(b)

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

0.70.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2

b

MC/Data

,! measurement di↵erentiates MC models, e.g. pQCD/npQCD interplay ,! would be interesting to check for generator tunes & settings, possibly

gradually move to standard (inclusive) 3-jet selection

PYTHIA/Herwig does not quite describe data, whereas Sherpa fares much better.

(21)

Sherpa 2.2 news and activities

PYTHIA 8.2 news

Newmatch&merge schemes (now 8) and options.

Weak showers: q→ qZ⁰, q→ q⁰W^± (also merged).

Allow reweighting of rare shower branchings. Automatedparton-shower uncertainty bands.

Extended interface for external shower plugins.

Z/W + jets results

The Pythia distributions are normalized such that first bin fit the data.

The shower starting scale is ˆs for Drell-Yan

and p

_?

for QCD 2 ! 2.

ATLAS data Drell-Yan production Radiation Combined

10² 10¹ 1 10¹ 10²

s( Njet), Z! µ⁺µ , p_?(jet) > 30 GeV,|yjet< 4.4|

s(Z!µ+µ+Njet)[pb]

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

Njet

MC/data

Complete LHEF v3 support.

Can run Madgraph5 aMC@NLO and POWHEG BOX from within PYTHIA.

Complete Python interface.

(23)

PYTHIA 8.2 news

Newmatch&merge schemes (now 8) and options.

Weak showers: q→ qZ⁰, q→ q⁰W^± (also merged).

Allow reweighting of rare shower branchings.

Automatedparton-shower uncertainty bands.

Extended interface for external shower plugins.

Z/W + jets results

The Pythia distributions are normalized such that first bin fit the data.

The shower starting scale is ˆs for Drell-Yan

and p

_?

for QCD 2 ! 2.

ATLAS data Drell-Yan production Radiation Combined

10² 10¹ 1 10¹ 10²

s( Njet), Z! µ⁺µ , p_?(jet) > 30 GeV,|yjet< 4.4|

s(Z!µ+µ+Njet)[pb]

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

Njet

MC/data

JRC (Lund) CR and Weak Showers November 5, Lund 12 / 30

Complete LHEF v3 support.

Can run Madgraph5 aMC@NLO and POWHEG BOX from within PYTHIA.

Complete Python interface.

(24)

PYTHIA 8.2 news

CR off default forced random

100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240

0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045

Reconstructed top mass, mW∈ [75, 85] GeV, pT(jets) > 40 GeV

mtop[GeV]

1/NdN/dmtop[GeV−1]

Tests - ⇤/K

_s

and ⌅/⇤

Data Pythia Pythia new CR

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

L/K⁰Sversus transverse momentum atps = 7 TeV

N(L)/N(K

0 S)

0 2 4 6 8 10

0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

pT[GeV/c]

MC/Data

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3

X /L versus transverse momentum atps = 7 TeV

N(X)/N(L)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

pT[GeV/c]

MC/Data

⇤/K_S is better described by the model (overall yield is tuned) (No rate change in e⁺e )

⌅/⇤ is the same as old model - no strangeness enhancement Many newcolour

reconnection models.

Double onium production. New model forhard diffraction.

Several new tunes; Monashnew default. Ongoing work and plans:

γγ, γp and ep.

Total, elastic and diffractive cross sections. Improved showers and hadronization.

(25)

PYTHIA 8.2 news

CR off default forced random

100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240

0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045

Reconstructed top mass, mW∈ [75, 85] GeV, pT(jets) > 40 GeV

mtop[GeV]

1/NdN/dmtop[GeV−1]

Tests - ⇤/K

_s

and ⌅/⇤

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

L/K⁰Sversus transverse momentum atps = 7 TeV

N(L)/N(K

0 S)

0 2 4 6 8 10

0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

pT[GeV/c]

MC/Data

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3

X /L versus transverse momentum atps = 7 TeV

N(X)/N(L)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

pT[GeV/c]

MC/Data

⇤/K_S is better described by the model (overall yield is tuned) (No rate change in e⁺e )

⌅/⇤ is the same as old model - no strangeness enhancement

JRC (Lund) CR and Weak Showers November 5, Lund 22 / 30

Many newcolour reconnection models.

Double onium production.

New model forhard diffraction.

Several new tunes; Monashnew default.

γγ, γp and ep.

Total, elastic and diffractive cross sections.

Improved showers and hadronization.

(26)

Match and merge strategies

Input from:

Madgraph5 aMC@NLO POWHEG BOX ALPGEN COMIX/Sherpa NLOJET++

JETRAD HJETS++

BlackHat GoSam Helac OpenLoops VBFNLO

CalpHEP/CompHEP . . .

legs n +1 +2 +3 +4 loops

0 1 2

0

1 CKKW

CKKW-L MLM UMEPS MC@NLO POWHEG MENLOPS MEPS@NLO NL³

UNLOPS FxFx NNLOPS MiNLO UN²LOPS MIN²LOPS Intense activity, no “final word”.

(27)

Combination strategies

Big flexibility, but different baseline “world view”:

MadGraph:

ME gen M&M Event gen

Herwig, Sherpa:

ME gen

M&M Event gen

Pythia:

M&M Event gen

ME gen Les Houches

Event gen = ISR + FSR + MPI + BBR + CR + hadronization + . . . 6= “hadronizer”

ME and Event Generators both indispensable

(28)

VINCIA: an Interleaved Antennae shower

Markovian process: no memory of path to reach current state.

Based on antenna factorization of amplitudes and phase space.

Smooth ordering fills whole phase space.

Step-by-step reweighting to new matrix elements:

Z→ Zj → Zjj → Zjjj (also Sudakov), e.g.

W = |MZj|² P

iai|MZ|²_i Replaces PYTHIA normal showers;

recent release.

A Result

Predictions made with publicly available VINCIA2.0.01 (vincia.hepforge.org) + PYTHIA8

+ MADGRAPH4 CMS data

Phys. Lett. B 722 (2013) 238 no MECs

MECsO(a¹s) MECsO(a²s) MECsO(^a³s)

10 ² 10 ¹ 1

CMS, Df(Z, J1),p_s=7 TeV 1 sds df

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

Df(Z, J1)[rad]

MC/Data

Shower only

$&

% c c

(29)

DIRE: a Dipole Resummation shower

Joint Sherpa/PYTHIA development, but separate implementations, means technically well tested.

“Midpoint between dipole and parton shower”,

dipole with emitter & spectator, but not quite CS ones:

unified initial–initial, initial–final, final–initial, final–final.

Soft term of kernels in all dipole types is less singular

1

1− z → 1− z (1− z)²+ p²_⊥/M²

The midpoint between dipole and parton showers

SherpaMC

⇥10¹

⇥10²

⇥10³

⇥10⁴

⇥105

⇥10⁶

⇥10⁷

⇥108 ATLAS data

Phys.Rev.Lett. 106 (2011) 172002 Dire

0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

109 10⁸ 107 10⁶ 10⁵ 10⁴ 10³ 10² 10¹ 1

10¹Dijet azimuthal decorrelations

Df [rad/p]

1/sds/dDf[p/rad]

110<p^max_?/GeV<160 0.6

0.81 1.2 1.4

?

MC/Data

160<p^max_?/GeV<210 0.6

0.81 1.21.4

?

MC/Data

210<p^max_?/GeV<260 0.60.81

1.2

1.4 ^?

MC/Data

260<p^max_?/GeV<310 0.6

0.81 1.2 1.4

?

MC/Data

310<p^max_?/GeV<400 0.60.81

1.2

1.4 ^?

MC/Data

400<p^max_?/GeV<500 0.6

0.81 1.2 1.4

?

MC/Data

500<pmax?/GeV<600 0.6

0.81 1.21.4

?

MC/Data

600<p^max_?/GeV<800 0.6

0.81 1.2 1.4

?

MC/Data

p^max_?/GeV>800

0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

0.6 0.81 1.21.4

?

Df [rad/p]

MC/Data

Torbj¨orn Sj¨ostrand Status and Developments of Event Generators slide 25/28 14

(30)

Apologies: will not cover

High Energy Jets (HEJ): BFKL-inspired description of well-separated multijets, with approximate matrix elements and virtual corrections.

Deductor: improved handling of colour, partitioned dipoles, all final partons share recoil, q²/E evolution variable.

Geneva: Soft Collinear Effective Theory resummed (exclusive) n-jet rates as starting point for showers.

Ariadne: first dipole parton shower program.

DIPSY: evolution and collision of dipoles in transverse space.

revivedFritiof: overlayed modified pp collisions to model pA.

EPOS: pp/pA/AA, MPI + strings, saturation, thermalized core separate from corona, hydrodynamical evolution.

DPMJET, QGSJET, SIBYLL: other pp/pA/AA/cosmic ray.

. . .

(31)

Summary and Outlook

Increased ME calculational capability: legs and loops.

Match and merge approaches still steadily developing.

Generators typically offer several options.

Spread between approaches one measure of uncertainty.

Continued/increased interest in parton shower development, with each generator offering several options.

Automated uncertainty bands for scale choices etc.

Many challenges remaining in soft physics, pA, AA:

diffraction, colour reconnection, collective effects, . . . Generators have gone from fringe activity for a few to a mainstream part of phenomenology research.

(32)

Status and Developments of Event Generators