Hi Kerstin,

Kerstin Tackmann wrote:
> Hi Wolfgang,
> 

>> There are two ways out. Either we switch to release 18 MC/SP8 which will
>> have better D** description, better other things, but we have to adjust
>> a lot of (more or less hard) coded numbers. But it will also solve the
>> SP5/SP6 difference for the signal MC. We have to calculate new weights
>> and magic factors. The other way is to apply some reweigting for SP5 to
>> get the same as SP6.
>>
>> Kerstin, haven't you produced something for this? Which we are not using
>> at the moment?
> 
> I am not quite sure I understand your question correctly. I'll try
> different interpretations - if you meant neither, let me know....
> 
> a) As Heiko already said, reweighting the D** in SP5 to get the improved
> description in SP6 is not really possible, because the low mD** are simply
> not populated in SP5, so there is nothing we could reweight.
> 

This was my question. Thanks,

	Wolfgang

> b) We are using some reweighting to adjust the ratio of SP5/SP6 in the
> nonres and resonant signal MC and so that it corresponds to the ratio of
> Run1-3/Run4.  This is what you mention in a later email.
> This is only for signal MC at this point, though (and when we introduced
> this, the magic k numbers where adjusted accordingly).
> 
> c) We have not yet looked at any reweighting of SP5/SP6 for the generic MC
> to account for differences in overall normalization as far as I know.
> 
> Cheers,
> Kerstin
> 

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolfgang Menges
Queen Mary, University of London               SLAC, MS 35
Mile End Road                                  2575 Sand Hill Road
London, E1 4NS, UK                             Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA
+44 20 7882 3753                               ++1 650 926 8503
                                                [log in to unmask]
------------------------------------------------------------------------