Previously published and as yet unpublished QCD results obtained with the ALEPH detector at LEP1 are presented. The unprecedented statistics allows detailed studies of both perturbative and non-perturbative aspects of strong interactions to be carried out using hadronic Z and tau decays. The studies presented include precise determinations of the strong coupling constant, tests of its flavour independence, tests of the SU(3) gauge structure of QCD, study of coherence effects, and measurements of single-particle inclusive distributions and two-particle correlations for many identified baryons and mesons.
Charged particle sphericity distribution.
Charged particle aplanarity distribution.
Charged particle Thrust distribution.
Quark and gluon jets with the same energy, 24 GeV, are compared in symmetric three-jet configurations from hadronic Z decays observed by the ALEPH detector. Jets are defined using the Durham algorithm. Gluon jets are identified using an anti-tag on b jets, based on a track impact parameter method. The comparison of gluon and mixed flavour quark jets shows that gluon jets have a softer fragmentation function, a larger angular width and a higher particle multiplicity, Evidence is presented which shows that the corresponding differences between gluon and b jets are significantly smaller. In a statistically limited comparison the multiplicity in c jets was found to be comparable with that observed for the jets of mixed quark flavour.
B-jets are identified with the lepton-tag analysis.
The same kinematics as in the table 1.
Distributions are presented of event shape variables, jet roduction rates and charged particle momenta obtained from 53 000 hadronicZ decays. They are compared to the predictions of the QCD+hadronization models JETSET, ARIADNE and HERWIG, and are used to optimize several model parameters. The JETSET and ARIADNE coherent parton shower (PS) models with running αs and string fragmentation yield the best description of the data. The HERWIG parton shower model with cluster fragmentation fits the data less well. The data are in better agreement with JETSET PS than with JETSETO(αS2) matrix elements (ME) even when the renormalization scale is optimized.
Sphericity distribution.
Sphericity distribution.
Aplanarity distribution.