4.7 Article

Elastic differential cross-section measurement at √s=13 TeV by TOTEM

期刊

EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL C
卷 79, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7346-7

关键词

-

资金

  1. NSF (US)
  2. Magnus Ehrnrooth Foundation (Finland)
  3. Waldemar von Frenckell Foundation (Finland)
  4. Academy of Finland
  5. Finnish Academy of Science and Letters (The Vilho Yrjo and Kalle Vaisala Fund)
  6. Circles of Knowledge Club (Hungary)
  7. OTKA NK [101438]
  8. Nylands nation vid Helsingfors universitet (Finland)
  9. MSMT CR (Czech Republic)
  10. Janos Bolyai Research Scholarship of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences
  11. New National Excellence Program of the Hungarian Ministry of Human Capacities [NKP-17-4]
  12. Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education [MNiSW DIR/WK/2017/07-01]
  13. [EFOP-3.6.1-16-2016-00001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The TOTEM collaboration has measured the velastic proton-proton differential cross section d sigma/dt at root s = 13 TeV LHC energy using dedicated beta* = 90 m beam optics. The Roman Pot detectors were inserted to 10s distance from the LHC beam, which allowed the measurement of the range [0.04 GeV2; 4 GeV2] in four-momentum transfer squared vertical bar t vertical bar. The efficient data acquisition allowed to collect about 10(9) elastic events to precisely measure the differential cross-section including the diffractive minimum (dip), the subsequent maximum (bump) and the large-vertical bar t vertical bar tail. The average nuclear slope has been found to be B = (20.40 +/- 0.002(stat) +/- 0.01(syst)) GeV-2 in the vertical bar t vertical bar-range 0.04-0.2 GeV2. The dip position is vertical bar t(dip)vertical bar = (0.47 +/- 0.004(stat)+/- 0.01(syst)) GeV2. The differential cross section ratio at the bump vs. at the dip R = 1.77 +/- 0.01(stat) has been measured with high precision. The series of TOTEM elastic pp measurements show that the dip is a permanent feature of the pp differential cross-section at the TeV scale.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据