Ciao Daniele,
could you post this in the review-HN in order to accelerate the review
process?
thanks
ric
On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Daniele del Re wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> as discussed at the meeting I performed the systematics due to the
> exclusive b->ulnu BRs varying separately the pilnu and the rholnu
> contributions instead of varying all the exclusive components of the same
> relative amount.
>
> These are the results:
>
> test BRBR
>
> BR(B0->pi+lnu) +30% && BR(B+->pi0lnu) +30% - 1.7%
>
> BR(B0->pi+lnu) -30% && BR(B+->pi0lnu) -30% + 2.0%
>
> BR(B0->rho+lnu) +30% && BR(B+->rho0,omegalnu) +30% - 0.5%
>
> BR(B0->rho+lnu) -30% && BR(B+->rho0,omegalnu) -30% + 0.8%
>
> BR(B->pilnu) +30% && BR(B->rholnu) +30% - 2.5%
>
> BR(B->pilnu) -30% && BR(B->rholnu) -30% - 2.8%
>
>
> as a crosscheck I tried to remove all the remaining exclusive compenent
> (not yet observed decay modes)
>
> BR(B->Xlnu (not pi and rho) -100% - 5.8%
>
>
> and it seems to go in the opposite direction but explanes why the
> hybrid and the non resonant model give then similar results (something
> like a compensation). Quoting this difference as systematics probably
> would be too conservative since it implies that we don't use at the
> theoretical information about eta, eta' , a1, b1 , f1 lnu decays.
>
>
> I propose to quote a simmetric syst uncertainty of 2.6%. Together with
> the systematics due to the fit using the pure non resonant model it gives
> us a systematics of ~4% that would be conservative.
>
>
> Daniele
>
>
>
>
>
|