Ok, let's try this gaussian
I get the following table...(errors are so huge: is it normal?)
#mx_l mx_h corr err_corr
0.00 1.55 1.821 +- 0.577
1.55 1.90 3.411 +- 95.487
1.90 2.20 2.839 +- 96.872
2.20 2.50 2.366 +- 100.470
2.50 2.80 1.948 +- 106.299
2.80 3.10 1.583 +- 114.362
3.10 3.40 1.271 +- 124.660
3.40 3.70 1.008 +- 137.194
3.70 4.20 0.726 +- 157.384
4.20 5.00 0.406 +- 198.663
Antonio
Heiko Lacker ha scritto:
> Hi Antonio,
>
> maybe this is not too surprising after all since the first bin
> contains the largest fraction of the signal.
>
> Now, that I'm thinking of it: there is a fit function which
> would avoid the problem of becoming negative, but which would
> nevertheless give probably a reasonable fit to the correction
> factors: a Gaussian.
>
> Cheers,
> Heiko
>
>
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, Antonio Petrella wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> here are the results of the jobs with new correction factors strategy
>> (i.e. fit with a first order polynomial starting from the second bin):
>>
>> PBRBR= (109 +- 10 +- 4) e^-4
>> chi^2 of the mx fit = 25.12/7
>>
>> I also run the systematics and the value I get is
>> sigma=22.5%
>>
>> These are the values that I should add to the talk, but are not
>> encouraging...
>>
>> Antonio
>>
|