Hoi,
I fitted both data and generic MC with the b2c shapes from either
generic only or from generic + cocktail = 'All'. In all different
setups (except B0 on data) the results with the shape from generic is
systematically lower by 21-30%. All this is done with the 'official'
files, and not yet constraining the fit.
======================================================================
Fitting data
----------------------------------------------------------------------
B0:
---
Generic: BRBR = 0.0034528 +- 0.00577785(stat) +- 0.0036574(MC stat)
All: BRBR = 0.00267254 +- 0.00714268(stat) +- 0.00220775(MC stat)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
B+:
---
Generic: BRBR = 0.0210934 +- 0.00441897(stat) +- 0.00225001(MC stat)
All: BRBR = 0.0267783 +- 0.00543305(stat) +- 0.0017851(MC stat)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
B:
--
Generic: BRBR = 0.0133686 +- 0.00347803(stat) +- 0.00185617(MC stat)
All: BRBR = 0.0169572 +- 0.00429294(stat) +- 0.00124563(MC stat)
======================================================================
Fitting GENERIC MC as data
----------------------------------------------------------------------
B0:
---
Generic: BRBR = 0.00982946 +- 0.00390754(stat) +- 0.00313629(MC stat)
All: BRBR = 0.012189 +- 0.00485377(stat) +- 0.00196494(MC stat)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
B+:
---
Generic: BRBR = 0.00823618 +- 0.00270148(stat) +- 0.00220829(MC stat)
All: BRBR = 0.0106768 +- 0.00331714(stat) +- 0.00142229(MC stat)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
B:
---
Generic: BRBR = 0.00843513 +- 0.00216119(stat) +- 0.001722(MC stat)
All: BRBR = 0.0109082 +- 0.00266792(stat) +- 0.00110181(MC stat)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Cheers,
--U.
|