%================================================================ % LaTeX file with prefered layout for H1 paper drafts % use: dvips -D600 file-name %================================================================ %%%%%%%%%%%%% LATEX HEADER %%%%%%%%%%%%% DO NOT DELET NOT CHANGE ANYTHING IN THE HEADER %%%%%%%%%%%%% UNLESS CLEARLY RECOMMENDED \documentclass[12pt]{article} \usepackage{epsfig} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{hhline} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{times} \usepackage{cite} %%%%%%%%%%%% Comment the next two lines to remove the line numbering %\usepackage[]{lineno} %\linenumbers %%%%%%%%%%%% \renewcommand{\topfraction}{1.0} \renewcommand{\bottomfraction}{1.0} \renewcommand{\textfraction}{0.0} \newlength{\dinwidth} \newlength{\dinmargin} \setlength{\dinwidth}{21.0cm} \textheight23.5cm \textwidth16.0cm \setlength{\dinmargin}{\dinwidth} \setlength{\unitlength}{1mm} \addtolength{\dinmargin}{-\textwidth} \setlength{\dinmargin}{0.5\dinmargin} \oddsidemargin -1.0in \addtolength{\oddsidemargin}{\dinmargin} \setlength{\evensidemargin}{\oddsidemargin} \setlength{\marginparwidth}{0.9\dinmargin} \marginparsep 8pt \marginparpush 5pt \topmargin -42pt \headheight 12pt \headsep 30pt \footskip 24pt \parskip 3mm plus 2mm minus 2mm %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% END OF LATEX HEADER %===============================title page============================= \begin{document} %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Pre-defined commands, you can use for the most obvious notations \newcommand{\pom}{{I\!\!P}} \newcommand{\reg}{{I\!\!R}} \newcommand{\slowpi}{\pi_{\mathit{slow}}} %\newcommand{\gevsq}{\mathrm{GeV}^2} \newcommand{\fiidiii}{F_2^{D(3)}} \newcommand{\fiidiiiarg}{\fiidiii\,(\beta,\,Q^2,\,x)} \newcommand{\n}{1.19\pm 0.06 (stat.) \pm0.07 (syst.)} \newcommand{\nz}{1.30\pm 0.08 (stat.)^{+0.08}_{-0.14} (syst.)} \newcommand{\fiidiiiful}{F_2^{D(4)}\,(\beta,\,Q^2,\,x,\,t)} \newcommand{\fiipom}{\tilde F_2^D} \newcommand{\ALPHA}{1.10\pm0.03 (stat.) \pm0.04 (syst.)} \newcommand{\ALPHAZ}{1.15\pm0.04 (stat.)^{+0.04}_{-0.07} (syst.)} \newcommand{\fiipomarg}{\fiipom\,(\beta,\,Q^2)} \newcommand{\pomflux}{f_{\pom / p}} \newcommand{\nxpom}{1.19\pm 0.06 (stat.) \pm0.07 (syst.)} \newcommand {\gapprox} {\raisebox{-0.7ex}{$\stackrel {\textstyle>}{\sim}$}} \newcommand {\lapprox} {\raisebox{-0.7ex}{$\stackrel {\textstyle<}{\sim}$}} \def\gsim{\,\lower.25ex\hbox{$\scriptstyle\sim$}\kern-1.30ex% \raise 0.55ex\hbox{$\scriptstyle >$}\,} \def\lsim{\,\lower.25ex\hbox{$\scriptstyle\sim$}\kern-1.30ex% \raise 0.55ex\hbox{$\scriptstyle <$}\,} \newcommand{\pomfluxarg}{f_{\pom / p}\,(x_\pom)} \newcommand{\dsf}{\mbox{$F_2^{D(3)}$}} \newcommand{\dsfva}{\mbox{$F_2^{D(3)}(\beta,Q^2,x_{I\!\!P})$}} \newcommand{\dsfvb}{\mbox{$F_2^{D(3)}(\beta,Q^2,x)$}} \newcommand{\dsfpom}{$F_2^{I\!\!P}$} \newcommand{\gap}{\stackrel{>}{\sim}} \newcommand{\lap}{\stackrel{<}{\sim}} \newcommand{\fem}{$F_2^{em}$} \newcommand{\tsnmp}{$\tilde{\sigma}_{NC}(e^{\mp})$} \newcommand{\tsnm}{$\tilde{\sigma}_{NC}(e^-)$} \newcommand{\tsnp}{$\tilde{\sigma}_{NC}(e^+)$} \newcommand{\st}{$\star$} \newcommand{\sst}{$\star \star$} \newcommand{\ssst}{$\star \star \star$} \newcommand{\sssst}{$\star \star \star \star$} \newcommand{\tw}{\theta_W} \newcommand{\sw}{\sin{\theta_W}} \newcommand{\cw}{\cos{\theta_W}} \newcommand{\sww}{\sin^2{\theta_W}} \newcommand{\cww}{\cos^2{\theta_W}} \newcommand{\trm}{m_{\perp}} \newcommand{\trp}{p_{\perp}} \newcommand{\trmm}{m_{\perp}^2} \newcommand{\trpp}{p_{\perp}^2} \newcommand{\alp}{\alpha_s} \newcommand{\alps}{\alpha_s} \newcommand{\sqrts}{$\sqrt{s}$} \newcommand{\LO}{$O(\alpha_s^0)$} \newcommand{\Oa}{$O(\alpha_s)$} \newcommand{\Oaa}{$O(\alpha_s^2)$} \newcommand{\PT}{p_{\perp}} \newcommand{\JPSI}{J/\psi} \newcommand{\sh}{\hat{s}} %\newcommand{\th}{\hat{t}} \newcommand{\uh}{\hat{u}} \newcommand{\MP}{m_{J/\psi}} %\newcommand{\PO}{\mbox{l}\!\mbox{P}} \newcommand{\PO}{I\!\!P} \newcommand{\xbj}{x} \newcommand{\xpom}{x_{\PO}} \newcommand{\ttbs}{\char'134} \newcommand{\xpomlo}{3\times10^{-4}} \newcommand{\xpomup}{0.05} \newcommand{\dgr}{^\circ} \newcommand{\pbarnt}{\,\mbox{{\rm pb$^{-1}$}}} \newcommand{\gev}{\,\mbox{GeV}} \newcommand{\WBoson}{\mbox{$W$}} \newcommand{\fbarn}{\,\mbox{{\rm fb}}} \newcommand{\fbarnt}{\,\mbox{{\rm fb$^{-1}$}}} \newcommand{\dsdx}[1]{$d\sigma\!/\!d #1\,$} \newcommand{\eV}{\mbox{e\hspace{-0.08em}V}} % % Some useful tex commands % \newcommand{\qsq}{\ensuremath{Q^2} } \newcommand{\gevsq}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{GeV}^2} } \newcommand{\et}{\ensuremath{E_t^*} } \newcommand{\rap}{\ensuremath{\eta^*} } \newcommand{\gp}{\ensuremath{\gamma^*}p } \newcommand{\dsiget}{\ensuremath{{\rm d}\sigma_{ep}/{\rm d}E_t^*} } \newcommand{\dsigrap}{\ensuremath{{\rm d}\sigma_{ep}/{\rm d}\eta^*} } %%% Dstar stuff \newcommand{\dstar}{\ensuremath{D^*}} \newcommand{\dstarp}{\ensuremath{D^{*+}}} \newcommand{\dstarm}{\ensuremath{D^{*-}}} \newcommand{\dstarpm}{\ensuremath{D^{*\pm}}} \newcommand{\zDs}{\ensuremath{z(\dstar )}} \newcommand{\Wgp}{\ensuremath{W_{\gamma p}}} \newcommand{\ptds}{\ensuremath{p_t(\dstar )}} \newcommand{\etads}{\ensuremath{\eta(\dstar )}} \newcommand{\ptj}{\ensuremath{p_t(\mbox{jet})}} \newcommand{\ptjn}[1]{\ensuremath{p_t(\mbox{jet$_{#1}$})}} \newcommand{\etaj}{\ensuremath{\eta(\mbox{jet})}} \newcommand{\detadsj}{\ensuremath{\eta(\dstar )\, \mbox{-}\, \etaj}} % Journal macro \def\Journal#1#2#3#4{{#1} {\bf #2} (#3) #4} \def\NCA{\em Nuovo Cimento} \def\NIM{\em Nucl. Instrum. Methods} \def\NIMA{{\em Nucl. Instrum. Methods} {\bf A}} \def\NPB{{\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B}} \def\PLB{{\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf B}} \def\PRL{\em Phys. Rev. Lett.} \def\PRD{{\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D}} \def\ZPC{{\em Z. Phys.} {\bf C}} \def\EJC{{\em Eur. Phys. J.} {\bf C}} \def\CPC{\em Comp. Phys. Commun.} \begin{titlepage} \noindent %\begin{flushleft} %{\tt DESY YY-NNN \hfill ISSN 0418-9833} \\ %{\tt Month YYYY} \\ %\end{flushleft} \noindent %Date: [today instruction is preferred] \\ %\today \\ %Version: Preparatives 0.1,0.2...; 1st draft: 1.0, 1.1...; 2nd Draft 2.0..., Final Reading 3.0,3.1... \\ %Editors: \\ %Referees: \\ %Comments by \\ \noindent %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%% For conference papers %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%% coment the header and fill the right conference %%%%% {\it {\large version of \today}} \\[.3em] \begin{center} %%% you may want to use this line for working versions \begin{small} \begin{tabular}{llrr} {\bf H1 prelim-10-013} Submitted to & & & \epsfig{file=H1logo_bw_small.epsi,width=1.5cm} \\[.2em] \hline \multicolumn{4}{l}{{\bf XVIII International Workshop on Deep Inelastic Scattering, DIS2010}, April 19-23,~2010,~Florence} \\ % Abstract: & {\bf xx-xxx} & & \\ Parallel Session & {\bf Small-x, diffraction and VM in DIS and hadron colliders} & & \\ \hline \multicolumn{4}{l}{\footnotesize {\it Electronic Access: www-h1.desy.de/publications/H1preliminary.short\_list.html}} \\[.2em] \end{tabular} \end{small} \end{center} \vspace{2cm} \begin{center} \begin{Large} {\bf Diffractive Jet Production in Deep-Inelastic Scattering with a Leading proton at HERA-2} \vspace{2cm} H1 Collaboration \end{Large} \end{center} \vspace{2cm} \begin{abstract} The cross section for inclusive jet production in diffractive deep-inelastic scattering is presented. The leading final state proton is detected in the H1 Forward Proton Spectrometer. The data have been collected during the HERA-2 period and correspond to an integrated luminosity of 156.7 ${\rm pb}^{-1}$. The data cover the range $x_{IP} <0.1$ in fractional proton longitudinal momentum loss, $|t| \leq 1.0~{\rm GeV}^2$ in squared four-momentum transfer at the proton vertex and $4 \leq Q^2 \leq 110~{\rm GeV}^2$ in photon virtuality. The dijet topology is defined by two inclusive jets in the central region, found by the $k_T$ cluster algorithm in the hadronic centre-of-mass system. The presented cross sections are corrected to the level of stable hadrons and compared to the Monte Carlo generator level predicitons and NLO predictions with applied hadronization corections. The NLO predictions describe the data in general well, while the Monte Carlo prediction shows a discrepancy in the overall normalisation. \end{abstract} \vspace{1.5cm} %\begin{center} %To be submitted to \EJC \;\; or \PLB %\end{center} \end{titlepage} % THE PAPER DRAFTS HAVE NO AUTHORLIST % % FOR PAPER ISSUED FOR THE FINAL READING % COPY THE AUTHOR AND INSTITUTE LISTS % INTO YOUR AREA % % from /h1/iww/ipublications/h1auts.tex % AND UNCOMMENT THE NEXT THREE LINES % %\begin{flushleft} % \input{h1auts} %\end{flushleft} % % Please not that the author list may need re-formatting. \newpage %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% \begin{figure}%[ht] \center \epsfig{file=H1prelim-10-013.fig1.eps ,width=\textwidth} \setlength{\unitlength}{1cm} \caption{Differential cross section as a function of $log(x_{IP})$ for the new data with tagged proton (`FPS`) to the result of the previous H1 analysis of diffractive dijets in large rapidity gap data. The published data are scaled down by the factor of 1.23 to account for the proton dissociation background not present in the proton tagged data. A good consistency between two independent experimental techniques is shown and also the phase space extension in $x_{IP}$ by a factor of 3 can be seen.} \label{fig:fig1} \end{figure} \begin{figure}%[ht] \center \epsfig{file=H1prelim-10-013.fig2.eps ,width=\textwidth} \setlength{\unitlength}{1cm} \caption{Differential cross section as a function of the transverse energy of the hardest jet in hadronic centre-of-mass system. The data are presented with the statistical error in the inner error bar and with the combined statistical and uncorrelated systematical error in the outer bar. The normalization uncertainty is approximately `5\%` and it is not displayed. The comparison to Monte Carlo RapGap generator generator level cross section is presented as a red line. The NLO H1 2006 DPDF Fit B prediction corrected to the level of stable hadrons is presented in the green bar, the combined scale uncertainty and hadronization uncertainty is shown. The NLO prediction is in a good agreement with the data within the total error.} \label{fig:fig1} \end{figure} \begin{figure}%[ht] \center \epsfig{file=H1prelim-10-013.fig3.eps ,width=\textwidth} \setlength{\unitlength}{1cm} \caption{Differential cross section as a function of the transverse energy of the second hardest jet in hadronic centre-of-mass system. The data are presented with the statistical error in the inner error bar and with the combined statistical and uncorrelated systematical error in the outer bar. The normalization uncertainty is approximately `5\%` and it is not displayed. The comparison to Monte Carlo RapGap generator generator level cross section is presented as a red line. The NLO H1 2006 DPDF Fit B prediction corrected to the level of stable hadrons is presented in the green bar, the combined scale uncertainty and hadronization uncertainty is shown. The NLO prediction agrees with the data within the total error.} \label{fig:fig1} \end{figure} \begin{figure}%[ht] \center \epsfig{file=H1prelim-10-013.fig4.eps ,width=\textwidth} \setlength{\unitlength}{1cm} \caption{Differential cross section as a function of $z_{IP}$. The data are presented with the statistical error in the inner error bar and with the combined statistical and uncorrelated systematical error in the outer bar. The normalization uncertainty is approximately `5\%` and it is not displayed. The comparison to Monte Carlo RapGap generator generator level cross section is presented as a red line. The NLO H1 2006 DPDF Fit B prediction corrected to the level of stable hadrons is presented in the green bar, the combined scale uncertainty and hadronization uncertainty is shown. The NLO prediction agrees with the data within the total error. In the highest bin effects of the direct pomeron remnant are expected. The discrepancy between the NLO prediction and the data might be related to missing pomeron remnant in the NLO prediction. } \label{fig:fig1} \end{figure} \begin{figure}%[ht] \center \epsfig{file=H1prelim-10-013.fig5.eps ,width=\textwidth} \setlength{\unitlength}{1cm} \caption{Ddifferential cross section as a function of $y$. The data are presented with the statistical error in the inner error bar and with the combined statistical and uncorrelated systematical error in the outer bar. The normalization uncertainty is approximately `5\%` and it is not displayed. The comparison to Monte Carlo RapGap generator generator level cross section is presented as a red line. The NLO H1 2006 DPDF Fit B prediction corrected to the level of stable hadrons is presented in the green bar, the combined scale uncertainty and hadronization uncertainty is shown. The NLO prediction agrees with the data within the total error. The discrepancy observed in the first bin might be related to the missing pomeron remnant in the NLO calculation. } \label{fig:fig1} \end{figure} \begin{figure}%[ht] \center \epsfig{file=H1prelim-10-013.fig6.eps ,width=\textwidth} \setlength{\unitlength}{1cm} \caption{Differential cross section as a function of $log(x_{IP})$. The data are presented with the statistical error in the inner error bar and with the combined statistical and uncorrelated systematical error in the outer bar. The normalization uncertainty is approximately `5\%` and it is not displayed. The comparison to Monte Carlo RapGap generator generator level cross section is presented as a red line. The NLO H1 2006 DPDF Fit B prediction corrected to the level of stable hadrons is presented in the green bar, the combined scale uncertainty and hadronization uncertainty is shown. The NLO prediction agrees with the data and the assumed Regge factorization is confirmed within the total error.} \label{fig:fig1} \end{figure} \begin{figure}%[ht] \center \epsfig{file=H1prelim-10-013.fig7.eps ,width=\textwidth} \setlength{\unitlength}{1cm} \caption{Differential cross section as a function of the absolute value of the difference of $\eta$ of the two jets in the hadronic centre-of-mass system. The data are presented with the statistical error in the inner error bar and with the combined statistical and uncorrelated systematical error in the outer bar. The normalization uncertainty is approximately `5\%` and it is not displayed. The comparison to Monte Carlo RapGap generator generator level cross section is presented as a red line. The NLO H1 2006 DPDF Fit B prediction corrected to the level of stable hadrons is presented in the green bar, the combined scale uncertainty and hadronization uncertainty is shown. The NLO prediction agrees with the data within the total error. The topology in the very last bin referrs to the configuration of two jets with very large rapidity gap. The discrepancy beyond the total error may hint to a different parton dynamics than the DGLAP evolution equations provide.} \label{fig:fig1} \end{figure} \end{document}