Signal extraction
The mass distributions for the dilepton candidates that passed the selection described in the previous section are shown in Fig. 1. In all cases a clear \(\mathrm {J}/\psi \) signal is observed over a small background. The data can be satisfactorily described in all cases by a combination of a Crystal-Ball function (CB) [33] and an exponential distribution, which represent the signal and the background from continuum dilepton production, respectively. The tail parameters of the CB distribution have been fixed to the values obtained by fitting simulated events.
Figure 2 shows the distribution of transverse momentum for dilepton pairs having mass (\(m_{\mathrm {l^+l^-}}\)) in the range \(2.9< m_{\mathrm {l^+l^-}}< 3.2\) GeV/\(c^2\) for all the samples, except for the dimuon case in the mid-rapidity analysis where the lower bound was raised to 3.0 GeV/\(c^2\) to make use of the better mass resolution of this channel. In all cases the transverse momenta populate the region below about 1 GeV/c, as expected from exclusive photoproduction off protons. These distributions are used to extract the number of exclusive \(\mathrm {J}/\psi \), within the stipulated mass range, in each of the measured rapidity intervals. An extended binned likelihood method is used in fits of data to a sum of templates for signal and background obtained from data (see Sect. 3.3) and from Monte Carlo (see Sect. 3.4) samples. These templates are also shown in the figure.
The number of candidates from the continuum dilepton template, which is a free parameter in the fit, was found always to be less than what is obtained, in the given mass range, from the exponential part of the fit to the mass distribution. This exponential distribution includes both the exclusive and the dissociative dilepton production, while the template describes only the exclusive component. The number of candidates for coherent \(\mathrm {J}/\psi \) production off lead has been estimated using STARLIGHT. The STARLIGHT predictions were rescaled so as to be compatible, within the uncertainties, with ALICE measurements in Pb–Pb collisions [34, 35]. The normalisation of the exclusive \(\mathrm {J}/\psi \) and non-exclusive background templates have been left free. Note that the non-exclusive background is lower at higher energies of the photon-target system, as has already been observed at HERA [10, 11], and also by ALICE [19].
The number of candidates obtained from the fitted template for exclusive \(\mathrm {J}/\psi \) production has been corrected for the feed-down from exclusive production of \(\psi (\mathrm {2S})\) decaying into \(\mathrm {J}/\psi +X\) [35]. This correction amounts to about 2% (4%) for the semi-backward and semi-forward (mid-rapidity) analyses. The correction factor to take into account the acceptance and efficiency (\(\varepsilon \times \mathrm {A} \)) of the detector was computed using simulated events, as described in Sect. 3.4. This factor depends on the rapidity of the \(\mathrm {J}/\psi \) and varies from around 3% to almost 9%. For the semi-backward sample the \(\varepsilon \times \mathrm {A} \) includes the efficiency of the V0C (around 60%) to detect the passing muon (because it is included in the trigger). The values for the number of exclusive \(\mathrm {J}/\psi \) extracted in the different data samples, as well as the corresponding \(\varepsilon \times \mathrm {A}\) factors and available luminosity, are summarised in Table 1. Note that, in order to make best use of the available statistics, both the central and the semi-forward (but not the semi-backward) samples have been sub-divided into two rapidity bins.
Estimation of systematic uncertainties
Several sources of systematic uncertainty have been studied. They are discussed below, while their contribution to the uncertainty on the measured cross sections are summarised in Table 2.
The uncertainty on the tracking efficiency in the TPC was estimated repeating the analyses using different track selections. Four different values for the minimal number of points and three values for the minimum number of TPC pads crossed by the track were used. The systematic uncertainty related to the selection of tracks at mid-rapidity was estimated from the spread of the variations with respect to the standard selection. It varies from 0.8 to 5.7%.
The uncertainty related to the identification of electrons and muons using their energy deposition in TPC has been obtained using an alternative selection based directly on the energy loss [36]. The difference between the two methods was used as an estimate of the systematic uncertainty, and was at most 1.3%. Cross contamination from muon pairs in the electron sample and vice versa was found to be negligible.
The uncertainty on the single muon tracking efficiency in the muon spectrometer was obtained by comparing the results of measurements performed on simulations with those from real data [35] and amounts to 2% (3%) for the p–Pb (Pb–p) period. There is also a 0.5% contribution from variations on the conditions required to match the trigger and the tracking information of a given muon.
Table 1 Number of measured exclusive \(\mathrm {J}/\psi \), value of the efficiency and acceptance correction factor, as well as integrated luminosity for each rapidity interval. These values are used in Eq. (1) to compute the measured cross sections
The uncertainties related to triggering in the muon spectrometer have been evaluated as in [36]. The efficiency maps of the trigger chambers have been obtained using data. The statistical uncertainty on this procedure has been used to vary the efficiency in simulations, which was then used to estimate a systematic uncertainty of 1%. There is also a small discrepancy between the efficiency in data and in simulations around the trigger threshold. This gives a contribution of 1.7% (1.3%) for the p–Pb (Pb–p) period. The addition in quadrature of these two effects yields the uncertainty on muon triggering.
The two main contributions to the uncertainty on the trigger efficiency for the mid-rapidity analysis come from the back-to-back topology condition in the SPD and TOF detectors. The first one was estimated using a data sample obtained using a zero-bias trigger (all bunch crossings taken). It amounts to 4.5%. The second one was taken from the analysis of [35]. It amounts to (− 9%, + 3.8)%, using a zero bias trigger to compute the efficiency and comparing the result with the efficiency from simulated events.
Table 2 Summary of the contributions to the systematic uncertainty, in percent, for the \(\mathrm {J}/\psi \) cross section in the different rapidity intervals
The efficiency of the V0C to detect one muon from the \(\mathrm {J}/\psi \) decay, which is needed in the semi-backward analysis, was estimated using events from the p–Pb period, whose trigger did not include this V0C requirement. The procedure was cross checked using the forward dimuon sample used for the analysis described in [19]. The efficiency depends slightly on the mass range used to compute it. The addition in quadrature of the statistical uncertainty (2.7%) and the mass dependence (2.0%) yields an uncertainty of 3.4%. The veto efficiency of the V0 detector can also be estimated offline using a more complex algorithm than that used in the online trigger. To estimate the uncertainty on the use of V0 to veto extra activity, the analyses were compared using the online V0 decision only and requiring (standard selection) in addition the offline decision, with the difference giving the systematic uncertainty. The uncertainty varies from 1.2% to 3.5%.
The trigger conditions associated with the upper limits in the activity in TOF, SPD and V0C have a negligible effect on the systematic uncertainty, because the limits are set well above the levels of activity produced by the signal in our sample.
The systematic uncertainty on the yield was obtained by varying the range of fit to the transverse momentum template, the width of the binning and the selections and smoothing algorithms used to determine the non-exclusive template (see Sect. 3.3). Furthermore, the value of the b parameter used in the production of the exclusive \(\mathrm {J}/\psi \) template was varied, taking into account the uncertainties reported by H1 [10]. The uncertainty varies from 1.9 to 3.6% (see “signal extraction” in Table 2).
The polarization of the \(\mathrm {J}/\psi \) coming from \(\psi (\mathrm {2S})\) feed-down is not known. The uncertainty on the amount of feed-down has been estimated by assuming that the \(\mathrm {J}/\psi \) was either not polarised or that it was fully transversely or fully longitudinally polarised. This uncertainty is asymmetric and varies from \(+\,1.0\) to \(-\,1.4\%\) (see “feed-down” in Table 2).
The uncertainty on the measurement of the luminosity has a contribution of 1.6%, which is correlated between the p–Pb and Pb–p data-taking periods and, in addition, an uncorrelated part of 3.3% (3.0%) in the p–Pb (Pb–p) configuration [37]. For the mid-rapidity analysis, which has data from both p–Pb and Pb–p, the uncorrelated part of the uncertainty on the luminosity amounts to 2.3%.
Furthermore, the uncertainties on the TPC selection, particle identification, offline V0 veto efficiency and signal extraction are uncorrelated across rapidity. The uncertainty on the \(\psi (\mathrm {2S})\) feed-down is correlated for all rapidities. The uncertainties on muon tracking, matching and trigger efficiencies are mostly uncorrelated across rapidity, and for the purposes of this analysis we treat the uncertainties as fully uncorrelated. (This includes also the measurements from [19].) The trigger efficiency at mid-rapidity is correlated between the (0.0,0.8) and (\(-\,\)0.8,0.0) rapidity intervals.
Table 3 Measured differential cross sections \(\mathrm{d}\sigma /\mathrm{d}y\) for exclusive \(\mathrm {J}/\psi \) photoproduction off protons in ultra-peripheral p–Pb (positive rapidity values) and Pb–p (negative rapidity values) collisions at \(\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02\) TeV in the different rapidity intervals. Values of the photon flux \(k \mathrm {d}n/\mathrm {d}k\), the interval in \(W_{\gamma \mathrm {p}}\) corresponding to the rapidity, the average \(W_{\gamma \mathrm {p}}\) (\(\langle W_{\gamma \mathrm{p}} \rangle \)) and the extracted cross section \(\sigma (\gamma + \mathrm{p} \rightarrow \mathrm {J}/\psi + \mathrm{p})\). The first uncertainty in the cross sections is statistical, the second is systematic and the third comes from the uncertainty in the photon flux
The mid-rapidity analysis offers two other possibilities to cross check the consistency of the results. One can compare the results of the cross section in the p–Pb and Pb–p periods, and one can compare the results of the electron and the muon decay channels. The cross sections agreed in all cases within the statistical uncertainties. As a cross-check, the possible contribution from incoherent production of \(\mathrm {J}/\psi \) off the Pb nucleus was investigated, and found to be negligible. In addition, the effect on the \(\varepsilon \times \mathrm {A}\) correction of varying the slope parameter b within the HERA limits was also found to be negligible.
Systematic effects related to noise or pileup events in the ZDC are estimated using randomly triggered events and are also found to be negligible.