Hi Urs,
do you understand why your electronID numbers have changed by a factor two
with respect to
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/lwgate/VUB-RECOIL/archives/vub-recoil.200206/Author/article-54.html
Also, it looks like we have a problem with the muon ID (what a
surprise...). I think the 10% error due to the MisID should be
double checked...
Anyhow, here is how the systematics table (that I have updated in the BAD)
looks like currently
& Relative Uncertainty (\%) \\
$B_{reco}$ composition & \\
$B\to Dl\nu X$ branching fractions& 4.0\\
$D$ branching fractions & 6.7\\
electron id & 4.7 \\
muon id & 11.0 \\
Kaon id & 5.3\\
$K_L$ reconstruction & \\
tracking & 3.4\\
neutral reconstruction & 2.0\\
\mes\ fit & \\
$M_X$ cut(theo) & \\
the partial total is 15%, dominated by the muonID (11%).[stat error is
17%]
The fit systematics should come from Luigi asap.
The Breco systematics might require more thought, it is unclear how to do
it
Klong sys might take a bit more (but the upper limit we used to have was
negligible)
ciao
ric
On Tue, 18 Jun 2002, Urs Langenegger wrote:
>
> Hoi,
>
> I pasted some numbers and corresponding illustrations into
>
> http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~ursl/talks/061802/main.ps.gz
>
> I'll update the BAD later today.
>
> Cheers,
> --U.
>
|