LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for VUB-RECOIL Archives


VUB-RECOIL Archives

VUB-RECOIL Archives


VUB-RECOIL@LISTSERV.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

VUB-RECOIL Home

VUB-RECOIL Home

VUB-RECOIL  March 2002

VUB-RECOIL March 2002

Subject:

can we use Ks to model Kl background distribution?

From:

Daniele del Re <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

25 Mar 2002 11:24:48 -0800 (PST)Mon, 25 Mar 2002 11:24:48 -0800 (PST)

Content-Type:

TEXT/PLAIN

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

TEXT/PLAIN (49 lines)


Hi all,

 finally I have some doubts about the use of Vub depleted sample with
reconstructed Ks to get the right Kl background subtraction.

 In our data sample we expect to have ~70 signal events for Mx<1.6 Gev.
Since the ratio S/B is 1/2 at the moment, we will have 140 background
events.

 From Guglielmo's studies we know that the 50% of background events are
due to Kl => we will have ~70 background event with missed Kl's.

 Since for physical reasons the number of Ks's has to be ~the same and
since the efficiency on Ks reconstruction (BR(Ks->pi+pi-)*eff(pi+pi-) is aroud
30% we will end up with ~22 Ks events from the depleted sample.

 This implies that the relative statistical error on this component
will be ~20% => the background subtraction related to Kl will have an
error of ~14 events and this is already similar to the statistical error.
The conclusion is that we can't use Ks.

 Then my proposal is the following:

 - use the depleted sample for all the remaining background component. We
have a lot of events with K+ from the depleted sample and the comparison
looks fine.

 - use MC for Kl with the following correction:

  * resolution correction looking at the difference in the depleted sample
    for a subsample with similar multiplicities

  * use control sample to evaluate the difference in the calorimeter
    deposits  for Kl. This is actually the only check we have to do and we
    don't need too much statistics. Suppose for instance to find a
    difference of 10-20 MeV in the calorimeter deposit. This should be a
    small systematic and we could use the MC shape. phi gamma control
    sample  could be very nice for us.

 We should discuss about this further.

 Daniele





Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2010
December 2009
August 2009
January 2009
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager

Privacy Notice, Security Notice and Terms of Use