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  January 2003

VUB-RECOIL January 2003

Subject:

new MC ?

From:

Urs Langenegger <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

10 Jan 2003 08:37:37 -0800 (PST)Fri, 10 Jan 2003 08:37:37 -0800 (PST)

Content-Type:

TEXT/PLAIN

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

TEXT/PLAIN (114 lines)


Hoi,

I used the command e.g. 

  skimData -g 1620000-1799999 --tableprefix objy --s SP -m "B+B- generic"

to obtain  the numbers  in the  table below on  01/08/03.  I  used the
runnumbers as given in

  http://www.slac.stanford.edu/BFROOT/www/Computing/Offline/Production/run_ranges.html

for the division into years: 

  2000 with bug  600000-759999
  2000 w/o  bug  1200000-1344999 

  2001 with bug  770000-1009999
  2001 w/o  bug  1370000-1609999

  2002 w/o  bug  1010000-1199999 1620000-1799999

As of today, I find the following numbers of events: 
=========================================================
MC <10.3.1a         B+ (10^6 events)    B0  (10^6 events)
=========================================================
2000                 9.6                 9.3
2001                24.9                24.9
---------------------------------------------------------
Total               34.2                34.2
=========================================================
MC >=10.3.1a        B+ (10^6 events)    B0  (10^6 events)
=========================================================
2000                22.2                22.2
2001                34.6                37.3
2002                56.6                54.7
---------------------------------------------------------
Total               113.4               114.2
=========================================================

The lumis for the data is 
  2000, 1900V  10.6/fb  
  2000, 1960V   9.6/fb
  2001, 1930V  35.6/fb
  2002, 1930V  25.6/fb

This amounts to 81.4/fb (on  resonance), which I take to imply 90x10^6
BB pairs.  The lumis are  in a ratio  of 1/1/3.5/2.5 or  (in integers)
2/2/7/5. I do not understand Concezio's 

 > Luminosity ratios: 2:1:6:3

>From this  one can see that currently  we have too much  2002 MC.  The
2000 data  should always be split  1:1 into 1900  and 1960 conditions.

If we want to  
 o replace the runs with <10.3.1a 
 o have 3x data statistics in MC 

we would need an additional 42x10^6 BBbar events: 
=========================================================
new MC              B+ (10^6 events)    B0  (10^6 events)
=========================================================
2000                 8.5                 8.5     
2001                12.5                12.5      
---------------------------------------------------------
In this minimal scenario the total sample is not properly lumi-mixed
since we still have too much 2002 MC. 

This can be remedied with the following scenario (removing part of the
2002 MC): 
=========================================================
new MC              B+ (10^6 events)    B0  (10^6 events)
=========================================================
2000                11.0                11.0 
2001                24.0                21.0      
2002                -12                 -10
---------------------------------------------------------
This would give a total sample of 
=========================================================
new MC              B+ (10^6 events)    B0  (10^6 events)
=========================================================
2000                33.2                32.2 
2001                58.6                58.3
2002                44.6                44.7
---------------------------------------------------------
Total               136.4               135.2

which is quite close to  the proper lumi-weighting. This is also quite
close to the 60x10^6 events needed posted by Concezio.

If we do not want to remove 2002 MC, we would need something along the
lines of: 
=========================================================
new MC              B+ (10^6 events)    B0  (10^6 events)
=========================================================
2000                21.8                21.8
2001                43.4                40.7      
---------------------------------------------------------

This picture  will change somewhat with the  additional 30x10^6 events
to be swept tomorrow, but since I don't know how much of those will be
BB, I cannot include them in my calculation at the moment.

Since I am still a bit jet-lagged, I may have erred somewhere above.

Cheers,
--U.





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