Hi all, I'm not quite sure how to proceed with respect to the S/P studies 
as Antonio has obtained results for the full weighting and they appear to 
be unstable?
C.C.

On Mon, 2 Oct 2006, Antonio Petrella wrote:

> Hi Chukwudi,
> actually I don't know how we want to proceed on S/P studies: it seems to me 
> that from the systematic studies the situation is not stable.
> For Mx-q^2 and P+ analysis, before leaving Italy I was setting up also the 
> fittest.C macro to be ready. But probably fixing S/P will not help too much 
> (?)
>
> Cheers,
> Antonio
>
>
>
> CHUKWUDI KWEKU CLARKE wrote:
>> Hi Antonio, you forgot to tell me if about the work being done for the 
>> Mx-Q^2 and P+ S/P studies. I'll look into that later today.
>> Cheers, C.C.
>> 
>> On Sun, 1 Oct 2006, Antonio Petrella wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Chukwudi,
>>> now I'm at SLAC. I don't know how much time I will spend on analysis since 
>>> I will have to attend to IFR software as well.
>>> 
>>> Anyway, when are you going to be at SLAC again?
>>> 
>>> ciao
>>>  Antonio
>>> 
>>> CHUKWUDI KWEKU CLARKE wrote:
>>>> Hi Antonio, I'm sorry for being absent for several days I had to get my 
>>>> things in order before I flew back to the UK. I'm now back for a couple 
>>>> of weeks. When will you be going to SLAC? Do you need help, what's being 
>>>> done for the Mx-Q^2 and P+ S/P studies? With alittle help I could look 
>>>> into these analyses if you want?
>>>> Cheers, C.C.
>>>> P.S. I'm still abit jet lagged but don't hesitate to ask for my help.
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, 27 Sep 2006, Antonio Petrella wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Heiko
>>>>> the MX fit plots are available at:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~petrella/tmp/scra/Ibuzero_nofit_ip020/zero_nofit_ip020fitresults.eps 
>>>>> for the ENRICHED SAMPLE
>>>>> 
>>>>> and at:
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~petrella/tmp/scra/Ibuzero_nofit_ip020_depl/zero_nofit_ip020_deplfitresults.eps 
>>>>> for the DEPLETED SAMPLE.
>>>>> I have used all reweightings and set the D**+other/(D*lv+Dlv) ratio to 
>>>>> 0.428585.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The third bin  (mx=[1.9,2.2] GeV) changes significantly.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Ciao
>>>>> Antonio
>>>>> 
>>>>> Heiko Lacker ha scritto:
>>>>>> Hi Antonio,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> can we also have a look at the plots for the MX fits, both for 
>>>>>> signal-enriched and signal-depleted?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm curious, after all re-weightings discussed so far,
>>>>>> how the fit performs above 2 GeV.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Heiko
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, Antonio Petrella wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> on the web page where I posted results of systematics due to 
>>>>>>> randomization of S/P:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~petrella/systsp.html
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> you can see that this systematic error is not stable, for example when 
>>>>>>> cutting on integrated purtity.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Now I'm trying to look at other results from these jobs to see if I 
>>>>>>> can find what makes this errors so large, but probably this is also 
>>>>>>> due to the S/P ratio and its error.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> For example if you look at the correction factors for IP > 0.50
>>>>>>> (http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~petrella/tmp/SP_allrew/SPallweights/ip050_allrew/corrallwip050pol1.eps) 
>>>>>>> you can see that the first bin has a large error (the exact value of 
>>>>>>> the correction factor for this bin is S/P = 5.67 +- 5.34)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> These numbers (they're on the spreadsheet at
>>>>>>> http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~petrella/tmp/SP_allrew/SPallweights/SoverPFullRew.sxc) 
>>>>>>> come from the double ratio of S/P on MC (0.74 +- 0.13) times the S/P 
>>>>>>> ratio on data depleted sample
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> (http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~petrella/tmp/SP_allrew/SPallweights/ip050_allrew/data_depl_AC_intp0.50_0.001.55.eps) 
>>>>>>> On data depleted sample the signal component (fitted) is 291 +- 31 and 
>>>>>>> the background component (fitted) is 38 +- 35, so the error on the 
>>>>>>> final S/P ratio is driven by the background component on data depleted 
>>>>>>> sample... and cutting on purity (and having less background) will give 
>>>>>>> roughly higher errors on background component (at least the 
>>>>>>> statistical error).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> For the data depleted sample we get S +- dS and P +- dP as they come 
>>>>>>> out from the fit and then we compute the quantity S/P +- d(S/P). But 
>>>>>>> these errors are correlated, aren't they?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ciao,
>>>>>>>    Antonio
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>