Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

145 submissions , 122 unreviewed
3,930 questions , 1,398 unanswered
4,873 answers , 20,701 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
502 active unimported users
More ...

W + jets at NLO

+ 3 like - 0 dislike
88 views

I would like to calculate $pp \rightarrow W (\rightarrow \ell \nu)$ + n-jets (n=2, maybe also 3) at NLO, with some cuts and plot some distributions.

I used MadGraph extensively for LO processes and I was wondering how reliable it is at NLO? Does anyone know any reference comparing multiple NLO codes? I have tried MCFM and I am not very experienced with it but the calculation seems to take a lot of time (obviously since it's NLO). Is there a way to make it run in parallel? I know that you can separate the real emission and virtual parts and then combine them later, but that doesn't seem to give a huge speed increase. Any help is appreciated. Thanks.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-23 15:14 (UCT), posted by SE-user henry mcfly
asked Apr 22, 2014 in Computational Physics by henry mcfly (35 points) [ no revision ]
You'd probably be better off asking selected colleagues who know these tools rather than Physics SE. The difficulty being the level of specialization ... I'm an experimental particle physicist and I've never heard of either tool. (Because I've never done collider physics ... it's been JLAB and neutrinos for me).

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-23 15:14 (UCT), posted by SE-user dmckee
Note also that parallelization of a code is often a non-trivial exercise.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-23 15:14 (UCT), posted by SE-user Kyle Kanos
@dmckee: yes, I will ask my experimental colleagues as well but as far as I understand there are groups in the experimental collaborations who only deal with generating data, and I don't know anyone from that group and the others don't seem to know much about it.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-23 15:14 (UCT), posted by SE-user henry mcfly
@KyleKanos: For this case it is more or less trivial, since each Feynman diagram and interference terms can be calculated separately (at least for the LO case), but divergences at NLO order might make things a little bit more complicated.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-23 15:14 (UCT), posted by SE-user henry mcfly
@dmckee: As far as I know Madgraph is the most used software for simulations at the LHC. I don't know enough about it to answer the question, but I think there is a chance somebody might be able to offer some insight.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-23 15:14 (UCT), posted by SE-user JeffDror

1 Answer

+ 1 like - 0 dislike

A search of the CERN document server for W+jets at NLO gives this reference as most recent and relevant:

In these proceedings we present results from a recent calculation for the production of a W boson in conjunction with five jets at next-to-leading order in perturbative QCD. We also use results at lower multiplicities to extrapolate the cross section to the same process with six jets.

In the PDF they refer to the programs used. You might contact one of the authors and get some help.

We use SHERPA [13] in association with the virtual matrix elements from BLACKHAT[14] to obtain our NLO predictions.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-23 15:14 (UCT), posted by SE-user anna v
answered Apr 23, 2014 by anna v (1,875 points) [ no revision ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar\varnothing$sicsOverflow
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...