> There is a region of big disagreement between 2.5 and 3. I discovered
> that is due to a small bug in the new code. In that range the weight was set to
> the one for the low mass region (that is very small)
>
I cant' see the fix in the committed code:
can you point me to the bug?
> Fixing this I got a new default and new plots
>
> new ric 1-d
> BRBR = 0.0211058 +- 0.00257061(stat) +- 0.000956233(MC stat)
>
> and plots
> http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/dataFINALdef_ricweightboth.eps
> http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/dataFINALdef_ricweightintegrals.eps
>
>
> unfortutely this fix enhanced the disagreement and now the shift is more
> than 2.5%.
>
> I studied a bit more in detail the reweighted non-resonant component.
> This is the comparison plot
>
> http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/twonres.eps
>
> red is the default and black is the new one. The agreement is good above
> 1.5 GeV but below seems to be 10-20% off.
>
> This result is somehow consistent with the numbers in the
> Alessio's page http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~asarti/recoil/talks/090603.html (mean
> weights that show a disagreeement only in the very first bin) but not with
> the plot shown by Alessio
> (http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~asarti/recoil/mxq2/TestRicgen.eps) in which
> I can't see a 20% disagreement below 1.2 GeV.
>
Okay...
I need to clarify better this:
the plot you're referring to
(http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~asarti/recoil/mxq2/TestRicgen.eps)
IS NOT made using weights for HY MC but JUST using Fermi Motion weights
(so the very first one has NO weights and is PLAIN nonresonant, while the
other two have ONLT Fermi weights for mb+ and mb- 1 sigma).
This plot is testing wheter me and Ric are starting from same
distributions to calculate weights. Is not testing the weights effect.
So the disagreement here can't show...
The other plot (the consistent one) is the same test you did and therefore
we are consistent (HURRAY HURRAY HURRAY).
Alessio
> Most of the difference between the two methods is below 1.5GeV. I have
> the impression that this could be possible only if the breco
> efficiency is very different between resonant and not-resonant while the
> distortion of the non-resonant model is not large enough to create such an
> effect.
> We should check this.
>
> Daniele
>
>
>
>
>
|