CMS logoCMS event Hgg
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN

CMS-PAS-SMP-16-007
Measurement of the weak mixing angle with the forward-backward asymmetry of Drell-Yan events at 8 TeV
Abstract: We present a measurement of the effective weak mixing angle using the forward-backward asymmetry of Drell-Yan (ee and $\mu\mu$) events in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}= $ 8 TeV at CMS. The data sample corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 18.8 fb$^{-1}$ and 19.6 fb$^{-1}$ for muon and electron channels, respectively. The sample consists of 8.2 million dimuon and 4.9 million dielectron events. With new analysis techniques and a larger dataset, the statistical and systematic uncertainties are significantly reduced compared to our previous measurement. The extracted value of the effective weak mixing angle from the combined ee and $\mu\mu$ data samples is $ \sin^2\theta^{\text{lept}}_{\text{eff}}= $ 0.23101 $\pm$ 0.00036 (stat) $\pm$ 0.00018 (syst) $\pm$ 0.00016 (theory) $\pm$ 0.00030 (pdf) or $ \sin^2\theta^{\text{lept}}_{\text{eff}}= $ 0.23101 $\pm$ 0.00052.
Figures & Tables Summary References CMS Publications
Figures

png pdf
Figure 1:
$ {A_\text {FB}} (M_{ {\ell \ell }})$ distributions for dimuon events generated with PYTHIA 8 using the leading-order NNPDF3.0. The dimuon rapidity is restricted to $|Y_{ {\ell \ell }}|< $ 2.4. (Left) $ {A_\text {FB}} ^\mathrm {true}(M_{ {\ell \ell }})$ in different $\mathrm{q\bar{q}}$ production channels. The curves are made using Eq. 5. Here, the definition of $ {A_\text {FB}} ^\mathrm {true}(M_{ {\ell \ell }})$ uses the known quark direction instead of the dilepton boost direction. (Middle) The observable (diluted) $ {A_\text {FB}} $ for different $\mathrm{q\bar{q}}$ production channels. (Right) The total observable (diluted) $ {A_\text {FB}} $ for different $|Y_{ {\ell \ell }}|$ bins.

png pdf
Figure 1-a:
$ {A_\text {FB}} (M_{ {\ell \ell }})$ distributions for dimuon events generated with PYTHIA 8 using the leading-order NNPDF3.0. The dimuon rapidity is restricted to $|Y_{ {\ell \ell }}|< $ 2.4. $ {A_\text {FB}} ^\mathrm {true}(M_{ {\ell \ell }})$ in different $\mathrm{q\bar{q}}$ production channels. The curves are made using Eq. 5. Here, the definition of $ {A_\text {FB}} ^\mathrm {true}(M_{ {\ell \ell }})$ uses the known quark direction instead of the dilepton boost direction.

png pdf
Figure 1-b:
$ {A_\text {FB}} (M_{ {\ell \ell }})$ distributions for dimuon events generated with PYTHIA 8 using the leading-order NNPDF3.0. The dimuon rapidity is restricted to $|Y_{ {\ell \ell }}|< $ 2.4. The observable (diluted) $ {A_\text {FB}} $ for different $\mathrm{q\bar{q}}$ production channels.

png pdf
Figure 1-c:
$ {A_\text {FB}} (M_{ {\ell \ell }})$ distributions for dimuon events generated with PYTHIA 8 using the leading-order NNPDF3.0. The dimuon rapidity is restricted to $|Y_{ {\ell \ell }}|< $ 2.4. The total observable (diluted) $ {A_\text {FB}} $ for different $|Y_{ {\ell \ell }}|$ bins.

png pdf
Figure 2:
Dimuon (left) and dielectron (right) mass distributions in three representative rapidity bins: $|Y_{ {\ell \ell }}|< $ 0.4 (top), 0.8 $ < |Y_{ {\ell \ell }}| < $ 1.2 (center), and 1.6 $ < |Y_{ {\ell \ell }}| < $ 2.0 (bottom).

png pdf
Figure 2-a:
Dimuon mass distribution in representative rapidity bin $|Y_{ {\ell \ell }}|< $ 0.4.

png pdf
Figure 2-b:
Dielectron mass distribution in representative rapidity bin $|Y_{ {\ell \ell }}|< $ 0.4.

png pdf
Figure 2-c:
Dimuon mass distribution in representative rapidity bin 0.8 $ < |Y_{ {\ell \ell }}|< $ 1.2.

png pdf
Figure 2-d:
Dielectron mass distribution in representative rapidity bin 0.8 $ < |Y_{ {\ell \ell }}|< $ 1.2.

png pdf
Figure 2-e:
Dimuon mass distribution in representative rapidity bin 1.6 $ < |Y_{ {\ell \ell }}| < $ 2.0.

png pdf
Figure 2-f:
Dielectron mass distribution in representative rapidity bin 1.6 $ < |Y_{ {\ell \ell }}| < $ 2.0.

png pdf
Figure 3:
The muon (left) and electron (right) $ {\cos\theta ^{*}} $ distributions in three representative rapidity bins: $|Y_{ {\ell \ell }}| < $ 0.4 (top), 0.8 $ < |Y_{ {\ell \ell }}| < $ 1.2 (center), and 1.6 $ < |Y_{ {\ell \ell }}| < $ 2.0 (bottom).

png pdf
Figure 3-a:
The muon $ {\cos\theta ^{*}} $ distribution in representative rapidity bin $|Y_{ {\ell \ell }}| < $ 0.4.

png pdf
Figure 3-b:
The electron $ {\cos\theta ^{*}} $ distribution in representative rapidity bin $|Y_{ {\ell \ell }}| < $ 0.4.

png pdf
Figure 3-c:
The muon $ {\cos\theta ^{*}} $ distribution in representative rapidity bin 0.8 $ < |Y_{ {\ell \ell }}| < $ 1.2.

png pdf
Figure 3-d:
The electron $ {\cos\theta ^{*}} $ distribution in representative rapidity bin 0.8 $ < |Y_{ {\ell \ell }}| < $ 1.2.

png pdf
Figure 3-e:
The muon $ {\cos\theta ^{*}} $ distribution in representative rapidity bin 1.6 $ < |Y_{ {\ell \ell }}| < $ 2.0.

png pdf
Figure 3-f:
The electron $ {\cos\theta ^{*}} $ distribution in representative rapidity bin 1.6 $ < |Y_{ {\ell \ell }}| < $ 2.0.

png pdf
Figure 4:
Comparison between data and best-fit $ {A_\text {FB}} $ distributions in the dimuon (top) and dielectron (bottom) channels. The best-fit $ {A_\text {FB}} $ value in each bin is obtained by linear interpolation between the two neighboring templates. The templates are based on the central PDF of the NLO NNPDF3.0 set.

png pdf
Figure 4-a:
Comparison between data and best-fit $ {A_\text {FB}} $ distributions in the dimuon channel. The best-fit $ {A_\text {FB}} $ value in each bin is obtained by linear interpolation between the two neighboring templates. The templates are based on the central PDF of the NLO NNPDF3.0 set.

png pdf
Figure 4-b:
Comparison between data and best-fit $ {A_\text {FB}} $ distributions in the dielectron channel. The best-fit $ {A_\text {FB}} $ value in each bin is obtained by linear interpolation between the two neighboring templates. The templates are based on the central PDF of the NLO NNPDF3.0 set.

png pdf
Figure 5:
Distribution of $ {A_\text {FB}} $ as a function of mass integrated over rapidity (left) and in six rapidity bins (right) for $ {\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}} = $ 0.23120. The solid lines in the bottom panel correspond to six variations of $ {\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}} $ around the central value: $\pm$ 0.00040, $\pm$ 0.00080 and $\pm$ 0.00120. The dashed lines correspond to $ {A_\text {FB}} $ predictions for 100 NNPDF3.0 replicas. The shaded band illustrates the standard deviation over the NNPDF3.0 replicas.

png pdf
Figure 5-a:
Distribution of $ {A_\text {FB}} $ as a function of mass integrated over rapidity for $ {\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}} = $ 0.23120. The solid lines in the bottom panel correspond to six variations of $ {\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}} $ around the central value: $\pm$ 0.00040, $\pm$ 0.00080 and $\pm$ 0.00120. The dashed lines correspond to $ {A_\text {FB}} $ predictions for 100 NNPDF3.0 replicas. The shaded band illustrates the standard deviation over the NNPDF3.0 replicas.

png pdf
Figure 5-b:
Distribution of $ {A_\text {FB}} $ as a function of mass in six rapidity bins for $ {\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}} = $ 0.23120. The solid lines in the bottom panel correspond to six variations of $ {\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}} $ around the central value: $\pm$ 0.00040, $\pm$ 0.00080 and $\pm$ 0.00120. The dashed lines correspond to $ {A_\text {FB}} $ predictions for 100 NNPDF3.0 replicas. The shaded band illustrates the standard deviation over the NNPDF3.0 replicas.

png pdf
Figure 6:
The top panel of each figure shows the $\chi ^2_{\mathrm {min}}$ vs best-fit ${\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}} $ distribution for 100 NNPDF replicas in muon channel (top left), electron channel (top right), and their combination (bottom). The corresponding bottom panels show the best-fit ${\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}}$ distribution over the nominal (blue) and weighted (red) PDF replicas.

png pdf
Figure 6-a:
The top panel of the figure shows the $\chi ^2_{\mathrm {min}}$ vs best-fit ${\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}} $ distribution for 100 NNPDF replicas in muon channel. The bottom panel shows the best-fit ${\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}}$ distribution over the nominal (blue) and weighted (red) PDF replicas.

png pdf
Figure 6-b:
The top panel of the figure shows the $\chi ^2_{\mathrm {min}}$ vs best-fit ${\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}} $ distribution for 100 NNPDF replicas in electron channel.The bottom panel shows the best-fit ${\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}}$ distribution over the nominal (blue) and weighted (red) PDF replicas.

png pdf
Figure 6-c:
The top panel of the figure shows the $\chi ^2_{\mathrm {min}}$ vs best-fit ${\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}} $ distribution for 100 NNPDF replicas in the combination of muon and electron channels. The bottom panel shows the best-fit ${\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}}$ distribution over the nominal (blue) and weighted (red) PDF replicas.

png pdf
Figure 7:
The extracted values of ${\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}}$ in the muon and electron channels and their combination. The error bars include the statistical, experimental, and PDF uncertainties. The PDF uncertainties are derived without (left) and with using the Bayesian $\chi ^2$ weighting method (right).

png pdf
Figure 7-a:
The extracted values of ${\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}}$ in the muon and electron channels and their combination. The error bars include the statistical, experimental, and PDF uncertainties. The PDF uncertainties are derived without using the Bayesian $\chi ^2$ weighting method.

png pdf
Figure 7-b:
The extracted values of ${\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}}$ in the muon and electron channels and their combination. The error bars include the statistical, experimental, and PDF uncertainties. The PDF uncertainties are derived with using the Bayesian $\chi ^2$ weighting method.

png pdf
Figure 8:
Extracted values of ${\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}}$ from the dimuon data for different PDF sets with nominal (left) and $\chi ^2$ reweighted (right) PDF replicas. The error bars include the statistical, experimental and the PDF uncertainties.

png pdf
Figure 8-a:
Extracted values of ${\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}}$ from the dimuon data for different PDF sets with nominal PDF replicas. The error bars include the statistical, experimental and the PDF uncertainties.

png pdf
Figure 8-b:
Extracted values of ${\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}}$ from the dimuon data for different PDF sets with $\chi ^2$ reweighted PDF replicas. The error bars include the statistical, experimental and the PDF uncertainties.

png pdf
Figure 9:
Comparison of the measured ${\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}}$ in the muon and electron channels and their combination with the previous LEP, SLC, Tevatron and LHC measurements. The shaded band corresponds to the combination of the LEP and SLC measurements.
Tables

png pdf
Table 1:
Summary of the statistical uncertainties. The statistical uncertainties in the lepton selection efficiency and calibration coefficients in data are included.

png pdf
Table 2:
Summary of experimental systematic uncertainties.

png pdf
Table 3:
Theory systematic uncertainties in the dimuon (left) and dielectron (right) channels. Detailed descriptions of each systematics are given in the text.

png pdf
Table 4:
Central value and PDF uncertainty of the measured ${\sin^2\theta ^{\text {lept}}_{\text {eff}}}$ in the muon and electron channels and their combination with and without constraining PDFs using Bayesian $\chi ^2$ reweighting.
Summary
We extract ${\sin^2\theta^{\text{lept}}_{\text{eff}}} $ from the measurements of the mass and rapidity dependence of $ {A_\text {FB}} $ in Drell-Yan ee and $\mu\mu$ events. With larger datasets and new analysis techniques, including precise lepton momentum calibration, angular event weighting, and additional PDF constraints, the statistical and systematic uncertainties are significantly reduced compared to our previous measurement. The combined result from the dielectron and dimuon channels is $ \sin^2\theta^{\text{lept}}_{\text{eff}}= $ 0.23101 $\pm$ 0.00036 (stat) $\pm$ 0.00018 (syst) $\pm$ 0.00016 (theory) $\pm$ 0.00030 (pdf) or $ \sin^2\theta^{\text{lept}}_{\text{eff}}= $ 0.23101 $\pm$ 0.00052. The results are consistent with the most precise LEP and SLD measurements.
References
1 J. C. Collins and D. E. Soper Angular Distribution of Dileptons in High-Energy Hadron Collisions PRD 16 (1977) 2219
2 SLD Electroweak Group, DELPHI, ALEPH, SLD, SLD Heavy Flavour Group, OPAL, LEP Electroweak Working Group, L3 Collaboration Precision electroweak measurements on the $ Z $ resonance PR 427 (2006) 257 hep-ex/0509008
3 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the weak mixing angle with the Drell-Yan process in proton-proton collisions at the LHC PRD 84 (2011) 112002 CMS-EWK-11-003
1110.2682
4 ATLAS Collaboration Measurement of the forward-backward asymmetry of electron and muon pair-production in $ pp $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 7 TeV with the ATLAS detector JHEP 09 (2015) 049 1503.03709
5 LHCb Collaboration Measurement of the forward-backward asymmetry in $ Z/\gamma^{\ast} \rightarrow \mu^{+}\mu^{-} $ decays and determination of the effective weak mixing angle JHEP 11 (2015) 190 1509.07645
6 CDF Collaboration Indirect measurement of $ \sin^2 \theta_W $ (or $ M_W $) using $ \mu^+\mu^- $ pairs from $ \gamma^*/Z $ bosons produced in $ p\bar{p} $ collisions at a center-of-momentum energy of 1.96 TeV PRD 89 (2014) 072005 1402.2239
7 CDF Collaboration Measurement of $ \sin^2\theta^{\rm lept}_{\rm eff} $ using $ e^+e^- $ pairs from $ \gamma^*/Z $ bosons produced in $ p\bar{p} $ collisions at a center-of-momentum energy of 1.96 TeV PRD 93 (2016) 112016 1605.02719
8 D0 Collaboration Measurement of the effective weak mixing angle in $ p\bar{p}\rightarrow Z/\gamma^{*}\rightarrow e^{+}e^{-} $ events PRL 115 (2015) 041801 1408.5016
9 S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re NLO vector-boson production matched with shower in POWHEG JHEP 07 (2008) 060 0805.4802
10 P. Nason A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms JHEP 11 (2004) 040 hep-ph/0409146
11 S. Frixione, P. Nason, and C. Oleari Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method JHEP 11 (2007) 070 0709.2092
12 S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: the POWHEG BOX JHEP 06 (2010) 043 1002.2581
13 H.-L. Lai et al. New parton distributions for collider physics PRD 82 (2010) 074024 1007.2241
14 T. Sjostrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Skands PYTHIA 6.4 physics and manual JHEP 05 (2006) 026 hep-ph/0603175
15 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the Underlying Event Activity at the LHC with $ \sqrt{s}= $ 7 TeV and Comparison with $ \sqrt{s} = $ 0.9 TeV JHEP 09 (2011) 109 CMS-QCD-10-010
1107.0330
16 N. Davidson et al. Universal Interface of TAUOLA Technical and Physics Documentation CPC 183 (2012) 821 1002.0543
17 J. Pumplin et al. New generation of parton distributions with uncertainties from global QCD analysis JHEP 07 (2002) 012 hep-ph/0201195
18 GEANT4 Collaboration GEANT4---a simulation toolkit NIMA 506 (2003) 250
19 CMS Collaboration Measurements of inclusive $ \mathrm{ W } $ and $ \mathrm{ Z } $ cross sections in $ \mathrm{ p }\mathrm{ p } $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 7 TeV with the CMS experiment JHEP 10 (2011) 132 CMS-EWK-10-005
1107.4789
20 CMS Collaboration Performance of CMS muon reconstruction in $ \mathrm{ p }\mathrm{ p } $ collision events at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 7 TeV JINST 7 (2012) P10002 CMS-MUO-10-004
1206.4071
21 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the differential cross section and charge asymmetry for inclusive $ \mathrm {p}\mathrm {p}\rightarrow \mathrm {W}^{\pm }+X $ production at $ {\sqrt{s}} = $ 8 TeV EPJC 76 (2016) 469 CMS-SMP-14-022
1603.01803
22 A. Bodek et al. Extracting Muon Momentum Scale Corrections for Hadron Collider Experiments EPJC 72 (2012) 2194 1208.3710
23 E. Mirkes and J. Ohnemus $ W $ and $ Z $ polarization effects in hadronic collisions PRD 50 (1994) 5692 hep-ph/9406381
24 A. Bodek A simple event weighting technique for optimizing the measurement of the forward-backward asymmetry of Drell-Yan dilepton pairs at hadron colliders EPJC 67 (2010) 321 0911.2850
25 T. Sjostrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Z. Skands A Brief Introduction to PYTHIA 8.1 CPC 178 (2008) 852 0710.3820
26 CMS Collaboration Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event and multiparton scattering measurements EPJC 76 (2016) 155 CMS-GEN-14-001
1512.00815
27 B. Efron Bootstrap methods: Another look at the jackknife Ann. Statist. 7 (1979) 1
28 U. Baur et al. Electroweak radiative corrections to neutral current Drell-Yan processes at hadron colliders PRD 65 (2002) 033007 hep-ph/0108274
29 K. Hamilton, P. Nason, and G. Zanderighi MINLO: Multi-Scale Improved NLO JHEP 10 (2012) 155 1206.3572
30 CMS Collaboration Angular coefficients of Z bosons produced in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 8 TeV and decaying to $ \mu^+ \mu^- $ as a function of transverse momentum and rapidity PLB 750 (2015) 154 CMS-SMP-13-010
1504.03512
31 D. \relax Yu. Bardin et al. ZFITTER v.6.21: A Semianalytical program for fermion pair production in e+ e- annihilation CPC 133 (2001) 229 hep-ph/9908433
32 W. T. Giele and S. Keller Implications of hadron collider observables on parton distribution function uncertainties PRD 58 (1998) 094023 hep-ph/9803393
33 N. Sato, J. F. Owens, and H. Prosper Bayesian Reweighting for Global Fits PRD 89 (2014) 114020 1310.1089
34 A. Bodek, J. Han, A. Khukhunaishvili, and W. Sakumoto Using Drell-Yan forward-backward asymmetry to reduce PDF uncertainties in the measurement of electroweak parameters EPJC 76 (2016) 115 1507.02470
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN