Paper detail

Exploiting exotic LHC datasets for long-lived new particle searches

Motivated by the expectation that new physics may manifest itself in the form of very heavy new particles, most of the operation time of the LHC is devoted to $pp$ collisions at the highest achievable energies and collision rates. The large collision rates imply tight trigger requirements that include high thresholds on the final-state particles' transverse momenta $p_{T}$ and an intrinsic background in the form of particle pileup produced by different collisions occurring during the same bunch crossing. This strategy is potentially sub-optimal for several well-motivated new physics models where new particles are not particularly heavy and can escape the online selection criteria of the multi-purpose LHC experiments due to their light mass and small coupling. A solution may be offered by complementary datasets that are routinely collected by the LHC experiments. These include heavy ion collisions, low-pileup runs for precision physics, and the so-called 'parking' and 'scouting' datasets. While some of them are motivated by other physics goals, they all have the usage of mild $p_{T}$ thresholds at the trigger-level in common. In this study, we assess the relative merits of these datasets for a representative model whose particular clean signature features long-lived resonances yielding displaced dimuon vertices. We compare the reach across those datasets for a simple analysis, simulating LHC data in Run 2 and Run 3 conditions with the Delphes simulation. We show that the scouting and parking datasets, which afford low-$p_{T}$ trigger thresholds by only using partial detector information and delaying the event reconstruction, respectively, have a reach comparable to the standard $pp$ dataset with conventional thresholds. We also show that heavy ion and low-pileup datasets are far less competitive for this signature.

preprint2023arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.