VUB-RECOIL Archives

Vub measurement using recoil of fully reconstructed Bs

VUB-RECOIL@LISTSERV.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Daniele del Re <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
03 Jul 2002 12:13:51 -0700 (PDT)Wed, 03 Jul 2002 12:13:51 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (38 lines)

Hi all,

 as you know, the various scans show strange points with very big
disagreement. Yesterday evening, looking in detail at the mes fits for the
those point we discovered that sometimes the number of fitted events
in each bin  does not scale properly (for instance with a tighter cut we
obseved more events). This is caused by some mes fit instability and the
fitted signal parameter, then fixed in each mx bin, were completely
screwed up. In particular this was true for the qtot=-1.0.1 and
mm2<0.6 fits, the ones with the worse behaviour.

 In doing the scans, we decided to fix the fit signal parameter (mean,
sigma and the two crystall ball paraemters) to the default fit in order to
make the scan more stable.

 Some of the  "bad" points will be improved. For instance:

 - All pcms 1.4

 it was

  BRBR = 0.0115333 +- 0.00391477(stat) +- 0.00107466(MC stat)

 now

  BRBR = 0.0130799 +- 0.00402433(stat) +- 0.00117502(MC stat)


 We should redo the scans with this feature in. I committed the code.

 Daniele






ATOM RSS1 RSS2