Hi Rolf,
I think our strategy will be (in lack of a better method)
for the time being to use this recipe. If the effect is
not large compared to other systematics I don't care if
we overestimate it. So let's hope...
Of course, if there is anything which is better than
that and can be implemented on a very short timescale
(to meet the ICHEP deadlines) we are happy to take that.
Heiko
On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Rolf Dubitzky wrote:
>
> I am not sure, but I would think that this overestimates the effect.
> I would think that the probability to _miss_ a 100MeV photon is ony given by
> the probability to miss-reconstruct its energy below your lower cut value.
>
> Cheers, Rolf
>
> On Friday 18 June 2004 13:39, Heiko Lacker wrote:
> > Hi Urs,
> >
> > the idea is to use the pi0 recipe. I don't
> > think we have something better for the time
> > being ...
> >
> >
> > Heiko
> >
> > On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Urs Langenegger wrote:
> > > Hoi Kerstin,
> > >
> > > > why in the BAD 540 analysis the uncertainty coming from neutral
> > > > efficiency has not been included as a contribution to the
> > > > systematic uncertainty?
> > >
> > > Is there a recipe for the inefficiency for single photons? I know of
> > > one for pi0, but not for photons.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > --U.
>
> --
> contacts: http://www.physi.uni-heidelberg.de/~dubitzky
>
|