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:
Heiko Lacker <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
11 Dec 2003 13:05:11 +0100 (MET)Thu, 11 Dec 2003 13:05:11 +0100 (MET)
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (34 lines)
Hi,

there is a principal question for the unfolding which I would
like to raise and ask for feedback.

Since we have to choose some binning (which in general will
differ from the binning chosen for the fit) there are two
ways to go:

1) We choose 'our' equidistant binning, perform a fit where
   all bins up to the cut value (1.55 GeV) are combined in
   one bin and choose the result of this fit to produce the
   final MX histo to be unfolded.

   In this case we would not get exactly the same answer for
   the branching ratio determination due to the different
   binning above the cut value although the effect should be
   small if the bin sizes do not get too small.

2) We perform the fit with the original binning and use the
   outcome of this fit to produce the final MX-histo with
   the bining chosen for the unfolding.
   That is, we force that the result of the original fit is
   taken into account to subtract the b->c and other BG.

   I guess the second alternative is the more natural one.

Please let us know what do you prefer.

Cheers,
Heiko and Kerstin



ATOM RSS1 RSS2