Paper detail

Disentangling Jet Modification in Jet Simulations and in Z+Jet Data

We study the impact of selection biases on jet structure and substructure observables and separate these effects from effects caused by jet quenching. We use the angular separation $ΔR$ of the hardest splitting in a jet as the primary example observable. We first conduct a simplified Monte Carlo study in which it is possible to identify the same jet after quenching in a heavy ion collision and as it would have been if it had formed in vacuum. We select a sample of jets by placing a cut on their quenched $p_T$ and, as is possible only in a Monte Carlo study, compare to the same jets unquenched, and see that the $ΔR$ distribution seems to be unmodified. However, if we select a sample of jets formed in vacuum by placing a cut on their unquenched $p_T$ and compare to those same jets after quenching, we see a significant enhancement in the number of jets with large $ΔR$, primarily due to the soft particles in the jet that originate from the wake in the droplet of quark-gluon plasma excited by the parton shower. We confirm that the jets contributing to this enhancement are those jets which lost the most energy, which were not included in the sample selected after quenching; jets selected after quenching are those which lose a small fraction of their energy. Next, we employ a method that is available to experimentalists: in a sample of jets with a recoiling $Z$ boson, we show that selecting jets based on the jet $p_T$ after quenching yields a $ΔR$ distribution that appears unmodified while selecting a sample of jets produced in association with a $Z$ boson whose (unmodified) $p_T$ is above some cut yields a significant enhancement in the number of jets with large $ΔR$. We again confirm that this is due to particles from the wake, and that the jets contributing to this enhancement are those which have lost a significant fraction of their energy.

preprint2021arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.