Public Figures from CMS Muon TDR (TDR-17-003)

The following figures, labelled "preliminary", are part of TDR-17-003 "The Phase-2 Upgrade of the CMS Muon Detectors Technical Design Report". While the text of the TDR document itself is not yet public, the figures below (and only these figures) and related numbers can be shown in talks and posters at conferences. Figures from the TDR that are not yet listed below can be added on request.

Links: Tracker TDR Figures - Calo Barrel TDR Figures - Muon TDR Figures

Figure	Caption
	Figure 1.23: L1 prompt muon trigger rates, with and without GEM chambers, as a function of muon trigger pT threshold in the region 2.1 < |eta| < 2.4. Click on figure for pdf (same as Figure 7.9. left)
	Figure 1.23: Right: L1 displaced muon trigger rates, with and without GEM chambers, as a function of muon trigger pT threshold in the region 2.1 < |eta| < 2.4. The L1 track based veto is expected to further reduce the displaced muon trigger rate by a factor of 3–8. Click on figure for pdf (same as Figure 7.12 lower left)
	Figure 6.1: Left: Efficiency of the combined L1Trk+L1Mu trigger as a function of true muon pT showing a large improvement in momentum resolution. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 6.1: Right: Efficiency of the L1Mu component of the combined trigger as a function of η. Note that current trigger algorithms do not use ME0 segments at the track building stage, which leads to an underestimate of the efficiency in the region above |eta&#124 > 2.1. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 6.2: Left: Trigger rate reduction with the deployment of muon direction measurement using GEM GE1/1 and CSC ME1/1 chambers. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 7.9: Left: L1 standalone muon trigger rate for the prompt muon algorithm, with and without GEM chambers included, as a function of the true muon pT in the region 2.1 < |η| < 2.4. Click on figure for pdf (same as Figure 1.23 left)
	Figure 7.9: Right: L1 standalone muon trigger efficiency for the prompt muon algorithm, with and without GEM chambers included, as a function of the true muon pT in the region 2.1 < |η| < 2.4. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 7.10: Left: Muon pseudorapidity distributions obtained from the simulation of dark SUSY events, generated by Madgraph, in which a Higgs boson decays to two dark photons, one dark photon decays to 2 muons, while the other decays to 2 pions. The barrel region is important for signatures with high pT muon pairs that require a single muon trigger. The acceptance of a single 30 GeV/c muon trigger is shown as function of η at the second muon station of the leading muon. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 7.10: Right: Muon pseudorapidity distributions obtained from the simulation of dark SUSY events, generated by Madgraph, in which a Higgs boson decays to two dark photons, one dark photon decays to 2 muons, while the other decays to 2 pions. The forward region is important for signatures with muon pairs of modest pT that require a double muon trigger. The acceptance of a double 10 GeV/c muon trigger is shown as function of η at the second muon station of the most forward muon. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 7.11: Left: L1 Muon trigger rate versus muon pT threshold for the barrel displaced muon algorithm. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 7.11: Right: L1 Muon trigger efficiency versus true muon pT for the barrel displaced muon algorithm. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 7.12: Upper Left: L1 muon trigger rate vs trigger pT threshold for the endcap displaced muon algorithm in the region 1.65 < |eta| < 2.1. The track veto is not applied here yet. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 7.12: Upper Right: L1 muon trigger efficiency vs true muon pT for the endcap displaced muon algorithm in the region 1.65 < |eta| < 2.1. The track veto is not applied here yet. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 7.12: Lower Left: L1 muon trigger rate vs trigger pT threshold for the endcap displaced muon algorithm in the region 2.1 < |eta| < 2.4. The track veto is not applied here yet. Click on figure for pdf (same as Figure 1.23 left)
	Figure 7.12: Lower Right: L1 muon trigger efficiency vs true muon pT for the endcap displaced muon algorithm in the region 2.1 < |eta| < 2.4. The track veto is not applied here yet. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 7.13: RPC hit time measurement distribution for muons from Z → μμ events and for semi-stable τ ̃’s with m about 1600 GeV, produced in p p → τ ̃τ ̃ processes. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 7.15: (Left) Resolution of a particle speed measurement at L1 trigger level with Phase-1 and upgraded RPC Link Board System. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 7.15: (Right) The efficiency as a function of beta of the standard L1 muon trigger without any pT threshold, and the RPC-HSCP Phase-2 trigger with 1.56 ns sampling time. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 7.17: Left: Tight Muon reconstruction and identification efficiency in DY events as a function of the simulated muon pT, for the Phase-2 detector in three pileup scenarios, compared to the performance of the Phase-1 detector. The results are obtained in ideal conditions, that is without taking into account the aging of present muon detectors and effects due to neutron background. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 7.17: Right: Tight Muon reconstruction and identification efficiency in DY events as a function of the simulated muon |η|, for the Phase-2 detector in three pileup sce- narios, compared to the performance of the Phase-1 detector. The results are obtained in ideal conditions, that is without taking into account the aging of present muon detectors and effects due to neutron background. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 7.18: Left: Loose muon reconstruction and identification efficiency in DY events as a function of the simulated muon |η|, at pileup 200, obtained including the simulation of muon system aging and neutron background. The performance is measured applying several upgrade scenarios incrementally, from the Phase-1 detector (with the addition of GE1/1) to the full scope of the muon system upgrade. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 7.18: Right: Tight muon reconstruction and identification efficiency in DY events as a function of the simulated muon |η|, at pileup 200, obtained including the simulation of muon system aging and neutron background. The performance is measured applying several upgrade scenarios incrementally, from the Phase-1 detector (with the addition of GE1/1) to the full scope of the muon system upgrade. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 8.3: Left: Four-muon invariant mass distribution for the signal, the irreducible ZZ background, and the reducible Z + X background. An acceptance extension from |η| < 2.4 to 2.8, 200 pileup events, and an integrated luminosity of 3000 fb-1 are assumed Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 8.3: Right: Four-muon transverse momentum distribution in the mass window 118 < m4μ < 130 GeV, for the signal, the irreducible ZZ background, and the reducible Z + X background. An acceptance extension from |η| < 2.4 to 2.8, 200 pileup events, and an integrated luminosity of 3000 fb-1 are assumed. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 8.5: Left: ratio of sigmaeff for η1 · η2 > 0 and η1 · η2 < 0. The inner error bars represent the statistical uncertainty, the outer error bars include systematic uncertainties assuming a conservative correlation of 0.8 between them for η1 · η2 > 0 and η1 · η2 < 0. The case of complete factorization of the partons is indicated by a red line, and the case of non-factorization by a green shaded band. The errors indicate the lowest measured value that would allow for an exclusion of the factorization hypothesis at 95% CL. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 8.5: Right: Predicted dependence of sigmaeff on η1 · η2 for the cases of complete factorization and non-factorization compared to the projected differential cross section measurement. The black symbols and hatched area indicate the expected sensitivity of the measurement; their central values are set to the prediction for non-factorizable sigmaeff. The black symbols show the extrapolation with muons up to |eta| < 2.8, the hatched band the extrapolation when restricting it to |eta| < 2.4. The blue symbol indicates the current result and its uncertainties. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 8.8: Right: Distribution of generator-level η of unreconstructed muons in WZ background events after selection of exactly two same-sign signal muons with |eta| < 1.6. The event numbers are for 3000 fb-1. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 8.9: Left: The transverse imparameter, d0, for several simulated decay lengths, ct, before reconstruction. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 8.9: Middle: Efficiency to reconstruct displaced muons from decays of long-lived particles as a function of the generated impact parameter |d0| using the dedicated DSA algorithm and the standard SA algorithm which includes a vertex constraint. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 8.9: Right: Distribution of the minimum number of valid hits in the muon system for a SUSY smuon (M = 500 GeV and tau = 1000 mm) for Run 2 (blue) and Phase-2 (red) detectors. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 8.10: Left: The 95% CL upper limits on qq ̄ → μ̃μ̃ for various mass hypotheses and ctau = 1 m. In both panels, the theoretical cross section for the specific model is represented by the blue solid line. For different SUSY breaking scales, tan beta or otherwise modified parameters, the cross sections may be 100 times larger, reflected by the blue dash-dotted line. Green (yellow) shaded bands show the one (two) sigma range of variation of the expected 95% CL limits. Phase-2 results with an average 200 pileup events and an integrated luminosity of 3000 fb-1 are compared to results obtained with 300 fb-1. The black line shows the sensitivity without the DSA algorithm, which reduces the reconstruction efficiency by a factor three. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 8.10: Right: The 95% CL upper limits on qq ̄ → μ̃μ̃ as a function of the decay length for M = 200 GeV. In both panels, the theoretical cross section for the specific model is represented by the blue solid line. For different SUSY breaking scales, tan beta or otherwise modified parameters, the cross sections may be 100 times larger, reflected by the blue dash-dotted line. Green (yellow) shaded bands show the one (two) sigma range of variation of the expected 95% CL limits. Phase-2 results with an average 200 pileup events and an integrated luminosity of 3000 fb-1 are compared to results obtained with 300 fb-1. The black line shows the sensitivity without the DSA algorithm, which reduces the reconstruction efficiency by a factor three. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 8.13: Left: Comparison of mass resolution for a 1.6 TeV τ ̃. In Run 2 the shown resolution can only be achieved offline, while the upgraded RPC link-boards in Phase-2 provide a similar mass resolution already at trigger level. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 8.13: Right: Efficiency of b reconstruction as function of b and η. With the Phase-2 upgrade events with b < 0.5 can be triggered with nearly 90% efficiency for η < 1.4. The z-axis indicates the efficiency by the color code. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 8.14: Left: Invariant mass m(μ + J/Ψ) in tt simulation with the Phase-2 upgraded CMS detector with 200 pileup events. Right: The resolution of m(μ + J/Ψ) for the Phase-2 detector, for the two pileup scenarios, and for the Run 2 detector. Click on figure for pdf
	Figure 8.14: Right: The resolution of m(μ + J/Ψ) for the Phase-2 detector, for the two pileup scenarios, and for the Run 2 detector. Click on figure for pdf

-- AndreasMeyer - 2017-10-24