 |
 |
Hi all, these are the results of the fit with multiplicity categories on the new root files. MC cocktail: ----------- - ratio(BR) = 0.0151 +- 0.0017 (was 0.0172 +- 0.0014 in the usual fit) * With three shapes fit - ratio(BR) = 0.0156 +- 0.0017 (was 0.0179 +- 0.0014 in the usual fit) http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/MCmulti/newMCshapech1ne1fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/MCmulti/newMCshapech1ne2fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/MCmulti/newMCshapech2ne1fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/MCmulti/newMCshapech2ne2fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/MCmulti/newMCshapech3ne1fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/MCmulti/newMCshapech3ne2fitresults.eps GENERIC: ------- - ratio(BR) = 0.0122 +- 0.0031 (was 0.0145 +- 0.0026 in the usual fit) * With three shapes fit - ratio(BR) = 0.0131 +- 0.0031 (was 0.0143 +- 0.0023 in the usual fit) http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/ http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/genemulti/newgeneshapech1ne1fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/genemulti/newgeneshapech1ne2fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/genemulti/newgeneshapech2ne1fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/genemulti/newgeneshapech2ne2fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/genemulti/newgeneshapech3ne1fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/genemulti/newgeneshapech3ne2fitresults.eps In general the relative error increases of about 30%. The fit has a nice behaviour even in the generic MC that has a pretty different signal MC (due to different MC). DATA: ----- http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/datamulti/newdatach1ne1fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/datamulti/newdatach1ne2fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/datamulti/newdatach2ne1fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/datamulti/newdatach2ne2fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/datamulti/newdatach3ne1fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/datamulti/newdatach3ne2fitresults.eps --------- These are the fit results on the depleted sample: (first two categories are not there since at least one charged particle is needed) MC cocktail: ----------- http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/deplMCmulti/newdeplMCshapech2ne1fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/deplMCmulti/newdeplMCshapech2ne2fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/deplMCmulti/newdeplMCshapech3ne1fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/deplMCmulti/newdeplMCshapech3ne2fitresults.eps GENERIC: ------- http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/deplgenemulti/newdeplgeneshapech2ne1fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/deplgenemulti/newdeplgeneshapech2ne2fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/deplgenemulti/newdeplgeneshapech3ne1fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/deplgenemulti/newdeplgeneshapech3ne2fitresults.eps DATA: ----- http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/depldatamulti/newdepldatashapech2ne1fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/depldatamulti/newdepldatashapech2ne2fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/depldatamulti/newdepldatashapech3ne1fitresults.eps http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~daniele/vub/depldatamulti/newdepldatashapech3ne2fitresults.eps As a general comment on data I can say that looking at the fits on data (both enriched and depleted but especially in the depleted) you can notice that the results in the categories with 0 neutrals (ch*ne1) are not bad while the distributions with one or more neutrals (ch*ne2) are pretty different from MC. Then the problem should be in the neutral reconstruction. Daniele