 |
 |
Sorry, was a bit to fast sending my first mail. A few days ago Henning has cross checked the BR's for D*lnu, Dlnu, D**lnu and D(*)pi(0) lnu using the old cochtail MC production. They are in a perfect agreement with what we expect. Maybe thats helpful for you. Oliver By the way, Do NOT use a generic MC for this task. It is biased because we only write out if we found a Breco candidate On Tue, 23 Apr 2002, Alessio Sarti wrote: > Hi all, > I've spent all day looking for bugs in the code but I couldn't find > anything wrong. That's the way I'm extracting BRs: > > BR = (NcatSL)/(Nb) > > a) I calculate the number of Bs as: entries in the rootfile (Nb) > > b) I calculate NcatSL as: given a category (cat) of decay (let's say > B->Dlnu) I loop overall the entries and ask 1) a semileptonic decay of the > B, 2) a true D 3) the number of daughters of the recoil B == 3. (this > requirement change in the case of a radiation photon: for each true photon > found I increase by 1 the number of daughters requested : 1 pho -> 4 > daughters. I've checked in the generator block that the photon is > associated to the B and not to the electron if the number of B > daughters is grater than 3) > > In this way the number obtained for the BR is still strange: > 2.43159 Dlnu > 7.33482 D*lnu > (discrepancies with yesterday are coming for the bug fix on counting > radiative photons). > > Now the disagreement factor with the PDG is not 2, but 1.7 (Dlnu) and 1.3 > (D*lnu). I'm going to put those number in the BAD: let me know if someone > has a suggestion or a question or has looked into the code and has found > something strange. > > Cheers, > alessio > > > > ______________________________________________________ > Alessio Sarti > Universita' & I.N.F.N. Ferrara > tel +39-0532-781928 Ferrara > roma +39-06-49914338 > SLAC +001-650-926-2972 > > "Vorrei tanto sapere chi e' che va in giro a costruire quadrati > sull'ipotenusa" > >