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:
Riccardo Faccini <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
01 Jul 2002 16:01:02 -0700 (PDT)Mon, 01 Jul 2002 16:01:02 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (74 lines)
Hi Urs,
how tough it is to do this with the uncorrlated error (which I am afraid
it must be just the difference in quadrature of the errors?)
	ciao
	ric

On Mon, 1 Jul 2002, Urs Langenegger wrote:

>
> Hoi,
>
> in the following are a few links to  scans for B, B0 and B+. I use the
> HEAD of IslBrecoilUser  (with 'mixcorr 2', which I  presume is the new
> way). Furthermore,  I fit with  the files contained  in inputfiles.dat
> (in /nfs/farm/babar/AWG7/ISL/tmp/rootfitfiles/lastfiles/.).
>
> By default, I get
>
> B   BRBR = 0.0180181 +- 0.00430567(stat) +- 0.00123682(MC stat)
> B0  BRBR = 0.00404501 +- 0.00715335(stat) +- 0.00210959(MC stat)
> B+  BRBR = 0.0277028 +- 0.00544833(stat) +- 0.00179499(MC stat)
>
> which    is   a    bit   different    from   this    morning's   talk.
> ~ursl/root/ballfit/BALLMX_1.55-MM_0.500.blog  is the logfile  for this
> default.  Daniele, do you have a logfile against which I can diff? I'd
> be interested how the difference comes about.
>
>
> MX scan
> -------
> B   http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~ursl/talks/070102/BALLMX-stability.eps
> B0  http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~ursl/talks/070102/BNUMX-stability.eps
> B+  http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~ursl/talks/070102/BCHMX-stability.eps
>
> The  total is  remarkably stable,  but B0  and B+  are anti-correlated
> (nothing new).
>
>
> MM2 scan
> --------
> B   http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~ursl/talks/070102/BALLMM-stability.eps
> B0  http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~ursl/talks/070102/BNUMM-stability.eps
> B+  http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~ursl/talks/070102/BCHMM-stability.eps
>
> We have a stunning stability of the (B0) result when loosening the cut
> on mm2.
>
>
> P scan
> -------
> B   http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~ursl/talks/070102/BALLP-stability.eps
> B0  http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~ursl/talks/070102/BNUP-stability.eps
> B+  http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~ursl/talks/070102/BCHP-stability.eps
>
> The sum has  been more stable previously, the  fluctuations are driven
> by B+.   The B0 result is perfectly  stable raising the p*  cut to 1.7
> GeV.
>
> Q = -1 .. +1
> ------------
> B   BRBR = 0.0235617 +- 0.00463323(stat) +- 0.0012843(MC stat)
> B0  BRBR = 0.0134943 +- 0.00717454(stat) +- 0.00206(MC stat)
> B+  BRBR = 0.0350774 +- 0.00628954(stat) +- 0.0020162(MC stat)
>
> The instability does not improve compared to the default setting.
>
>
> Cheers,
> --U.
>




ATOM RSS1 RSS2