 |
 |
> 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? your proposal is: vub 1' bin = data - vcb - other (after a three shapes fit, including model errors in the fit) err(vub 1' bin) = sqrt(data^2 + vcb(from fit)^2 + oth(from fit)^2) correct? this is fine with me (and this is actually the way it is immplemented for the "two shapes" fit) but how do you want to separate data stat. and MC stat contribution? Daniele