hi Kerstin,
you 're right we did studies about binning effects only for the 2D fit.
cheers
Vir
On Wed, 5 May 2004, Kerstin Tackmann wrote:
>
>
> Hi Virginia and Concezio,
>
> thanks. Does this imply that you have not done the binning study for the
> 1D mx fits yet?
>
> All, who did this study for the analysis described in BAD 540 and which
> values should be used for this?
>
> Thanks,
> Kerstin
>
>
> On Tue, 4 May 2004, Concezio Bozzi wrote:
>
> > Hi Kerstin,
> > in the 2D fit we varied the mx binning like this (MXBIN is the cut in Mx):
> >
> > 0,MXBIN,2.2,2.8,5 (default)
> >
> > 0,MXBIN,2.2,2.5,5 (move down 4th bin)
> >
> > Variable bins: define
> > x_1 = ((5. - MXBIN)/3.) + MXBIN;
> > x_2 = ((5. - MXBIN)/3.*2.) + MXBIN;
> > binning is: {0,MXBIN,x_1,x_2,5.};
> >
> > The associated (absolute) error on BRBR is less than 0.002.
> >
> > Virginia and Concezio.
> >
> > Kerstin Tackmann wrote:
> >
> > >Hi Concezio and Virginia,
> > >
> > >thanks. Actually it is most interesting to us how you varied the mx
> > >binning in the 1D fits since this is what we need to do as well. Could you
> > >point to to what you did there?
> > >
> > >Thanks,
> > >Kerstin
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >On Tue, 4 May 2004, Concezio Bozzi wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>Hi Kerstin,
> > >>we don't know how the binning was varied in BAD540 for systematic studies.
> > >>In our 2D fits, we are using 4x4 bins in (mx,q2) such that the first mx
> > >>bin goes from 0 to the mx cut, and the last q2 bin goes from the q2 cut
> > >>to 26. We have investigated some different possibilities for the q2
> > >>binning. Our default is to divide the q2 range between 0 and the q2 cut
> > >>in 3 equal-size bins, but this gives unstable results when the q2 cut is
> > >>lower than, say, 5. We therefore used constant q2 bins evenly
> > >>distributed (0,2,4,6,8,10,12,14,26), with more stable results at low q2
> > >>cuts. For higher q2 cuts, the two sets of q2 binnings give almost the
> > >>same results.
> > >>We also varied the mx binning with very small variations of the results.
> > >>Cheers, Concezio and Virginia.
> > >>
> > >>Kerstin Tackmann wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>Hi all,
> > >>>
> > >>>we have a question concerning the uncertainty from binning effects on the
> > >>>mX spectrum fits. In BAD 540 you say that you varied the bin sizes in a
> > >>>wide range and that you increased the number of bins. Is there some more
> > >>>explixit information on the actual binnings you used for the estimation of
> > >>>this uncertainty?
> > >>>Virginia and Concezio, are you going to use the values as they were used
> > >>>for BAD 540?
> > >>>
> > >>>Thanks,
> > >>>Kerstin
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
|