 |
 |
I would expect this is to be negligible because the normalization of the backgrounds comes entirely from the >1 bins, while the first bin is dominated by the Vub MC. We can make a test turning off the data error in the first bin during the fit (not in the result, of course)and check it does not matter ciao ric ______________________________________________________ Riccardo Faccini U.C. San Diego, Universita' "La Sapienza" & I.N.F.N. Roma tel +39/06/49914338 http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~rfaccini Univ. La Sapienza. 2,Ple Aldo Moro, I-00100 Roma Dipartimento di Fisica "We need serenity to accept what we cannot change, courage to change what we can and wisdom to distinguish between the two" [R. Kiplin, allegedly] On Sat, 2 Nov 2002, Daniele del Re wrote: > > > > > Since we have introduced the Vub MC component only to account properly for > > > signal leakage above the Mx cut, I suggest we compute the Vub yield as > > > data - Vcb component-other component > > > and the error is propagated accordingly (the error coming from 'data' > > > would be the pure statistics and the error on the other two pieces would > > > have to be splitted between MC stat and data statistics) > > > > > > does this sound reasonable to you? > > actually statistical error for data and vcb, oth component error from fit > are not uncorrelated since the first bin is used in the fit, right. How do we > want to handle this? > > Daniele > >