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  May 2005

VUB-RECOIL May 2005

Subject:

Update of exclusive D branching fractions reweighting

From:

Kerstin Tackmann <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

4 May 2005 01:13:12 -0700 (PDT)Wed, 4 May 2005 01:13:12 -0700 (PDT)

Content-Type:

TEXT/PLAIN

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

TEXT/PLAIN (52 lines)


Hi,

I updated ddecay.table for VirVubFitter (the old ddecay.table is still
there, but additionally there is ddecay.table.CM2). These are the changes:

   *The PDG values and errors are taken from PDG04. I could not
    find the BF for D0->K0pi0pi0 (also not where the value came
    from), so I left it unchanged.

   *The decay.dec column was obtained as follows:
    I produce 5mio events B->Denu (per B charge). The D then decays
    according to DECAY.DEC (I took DECAY.DEC from 14.4.3a which
    corresponds to SP6 according to the production page.
    I checked that the relevant parts agree with DECAY.DEC from
    12.6.0f which from the same page should correspond to SP5).
    Then I count the particles in the final state (counting pi0, not
    its daughters) for those final states we have in ddecay.table.
    I switched off PHOTOS for this, since counting was easier this
    way and this should not have any effect on the BFs we find
    (unless I am completely mistaken, PHOTOS is called after the
    event without the additional gamma was produced, or at least
    the first generation daughters). Let me know in case you object to
    this. I crosschecked that the 2 body final states are in good
    agreement to what I see directly in DECAY.DEC.


Most BFs for the MC are very similar to the former ones, I see significant
changes for the following decays:

D0->K pi pi pi, D0->K pi pi0 pi0 and pi pi pi0, all of which are in better
agreement with the current measured values.

D+->K pi pi pi pi, D+->K pi pi pi0 pi0, D+-> 5pi, again, they are in
better agreement with the current measured values.

The branching fraction mean values for D+->K0 5pi are quite different in
MC (0.000005) and PDG (0.0008+-0.0007), but of course the errors are huge.
I crosschecked that the small MC value by looking into DECAY.DEC (there
seems to be only the channel D->K0 omega pi, omega->4pi to contribute
and this has 0.000005. This is identical in DECAY.DEC from 10.3.1k,
which is the oldest I could find).
Naively, this would give us a weight of 160.
So far this final state was NOT reweighted and I kept it this way. Again,
let me know on case you object to this.

Cheers,
Kerstin



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