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:
Edward Hill <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
16 Apr 2004 09:56:48 -0700Fri, 16 Apr 2004 09:56:48 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (115 lines)
Ric-

to avoid confusion - surely you mean release analyis-20 (14 series) ?
we will be running on the sp5 objy in analysis-20, no?

Ed



On Friday 16 April 2004 09:55 am, Riccardo Faccini allegedly wrote:
> Hi Daniele,
> this means that when running on R12 we have to apply the cut.
> 	ciao
> 	ric
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Riccardo Faccini
> Universita' "La Sapienza" & I.N.F.N. Roma
> tel  +39/06/49914798 Fax.: +39/06/4957697
> http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~rfaccini
> Univ. La Sapienza. 2,Ple Aldo Moro, I-00185 Roma Dipartimento di Fisica
>
> "I don't understand what you say, but I believe I disagree"
>
> On Fri, 16 Apr 2004, Daniele del Re wrote:
> > Hi Ric,
> >
> >   as you know, purity at root code level and purity at Beta
> > level did not match in release 10. I fixed that for new skims and new
> > tables in beta should be as the ones used in bad 540.
> > As a consequence the cut you are talking about should be already in
> > place. if you remove sb4 you will take only modes that satisfy cut at
> > page 82 of BAD 540.
> >
> > rate on data went down to 1.6% (from 4%) and to below 7% for gene
> > MC.
> >
> > Urs could you take into account this rates and recompute your numbers as
> > far as disk needed?
> >
> > Daniele
> >
> > On Fri, 16 Apr 2004, Riccardo Faccini wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > I guess you are right
> > > my next suggestion is to cut on purity from the start, i.e. consider
> > > only events with a higher purity of the indivual modes.
> > > http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~rfaccini/lost+found/purcut.eps
> > > shows the distribution of the purity for generic MC events and the cuts
> > > that we apply at analysis level (we require the events to have a purity
> > > higher than a given one).
> > > It looks like we can save quite some time and space if we request for
> > > istance that all events have at least one candidate with a 8% purity.
> > >
> > > 	opinions?
> > > 	ciao
> > > 	ric
> > >
> > > On Fri, 16 Apr 2004, Oliver Buchmueller wrote:
> > > > It is certainly worth to test whether or not the normalization to
> > > > semileptonic events will work and perhaps even improve the
> > > > extraction of the BR(bsg). However, given the fact that there
> > > > is at least one thesis a stake I would still vote for a production
> > > > without cuts - unless someone can proof that an alternative way will
> > > > work as well.
> > > >
> > > > my two cents ...
> > > >
> > > > Oliver
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 16 Apr 2004, Riccardo Faccini wrote:
> > > > > hmmm, I see the problem ( ehem and I was among those who thought
> > > > > Fabio's thesis...).
> > > > > You can normalize to the number of semileptonic events. In this
> > > > > case you will be affected by the systematics on the cut on the
> > > > > lepton, but I think it will balance the systmatics on the mes fit
> > > > > which will be reduced.
> > > > >
> > > > > What do people think?
> > > > > 	ciao
> > > > > 	ric
> > > > >
> > > > > ______________________________________________________
> > > > > Riccardo Faccini
> > > > > Universita' "La Sapienza" & I.N.F.N. Roma
> > > > > tel  +39/06/49914798 Fax.: +39/06/4957697
> > > > > http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~rfaccini
> > > > > Univ. La Sapienza. 2,Ple Aldo Moro, I-00185 Roma Dipartimento di
> > > > > Fisica
> > > > >
> > > > > "I don't understand what you say, but I believe I disagree"
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, 16 Apr 2004, Henning Ulrik Flaecher wrote:
> > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I just noticed that the filtering on leptons and photons above a
> > > > > > certain energy cut is (most likely) not an option for the bsg
> > > > > > analysis as for the branching fraction measurement we need to
> > > > > > normalise to an unbiased B sample and so the full Breco sample.
> > > > > > This is how it has been done for Fabio's thesis.
> > > > > > Requiring a lepton or photon with a certain energy will most
> > > > > > likely bias our normalisation sample, e.g. all B->charged hadron
> > > > > > decays would be lost, a fraction of the SL decays etc.
> > > > > > The reason why the b->ulv analysis can live with this cut is
> > > > > > because they measure a double ratio of branching fractions, so
> > > > > > they can normalise to a sample with the same cuts applied.
> > > > > > At the moment I can't see how we can get around this but
> > > > > > appreciate any ideas!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > Henning




ATOM RSS1 RSS2