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:
Francesca Di Lodovico <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
13 Sep 2006 05:39:25 -0700 (PDT)Wed, 13 Sep 2006 05:39:25 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (39 lines)
Hi Heiko,

should we then interpret the fact that the partial BRBR is stable at
larger purity cuts due to the fact that the peaking contribution
is smaller? The original fitting model neglects that
component, so when that background is larger the fit might not give the
right result?

Cheers,
	Francesca

PS I read all the presentations and I do not have anything to add
to what already said. But in particular I think it is really needed to
have a slide on the reweighting in Antonio's presentation.
PPS I'll be on a plane this afternoon, so unfortunately I will not able to
attend the meeting...

On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Heiko Lacker wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have copied a ppt- and pdf-version of a transparency describing what
> Wolfgang has done concerning the fallback solution:
> http://iktp.tu-dresden.de/~lacker/fallbacksolution.pdf
> http://iktp.tu-dresden.de/~lacker/fallbacksolution.ppt
>
> From what I have seen in Wolfgang's directories it looks like that the
> chi^2 values are good:
> http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~menges/Vub/scra/intpur
>
> Maybe somebody else can also have a look...?
>
> Cheers,
> Heiko
>
>



ATOM RSS1 RSS2