 |
 |
Hoi, I used the command e.g. skimData -g 1620000-1799999 --tableprefix objy --s SP -m "B+B- generic" to obtain the numbers in the table below on 01/08/03. I used the runnumbers as given in http://www.slac.stanford.edu/BFROOT/www/Computing/Offline/Production/run_ranges.html for the division into years: 2000 with bug 600000-759999 2000 w/o bug 1200000-1344999 2001 with bug 770000-1009999 2001 w/o bug 1370000-1609999 2002 w/o bug 1010000-1199999 1620000-1799999 As of today, I find the following numbers of events: ========================================================= MC <10.3.1a B+ (10^6 events) B0 (10^6 events) ========================================================= 2000 9.6 9.3 2001 24.9 24.9 --------------------------------------------------------- Total 34.2 34.2 ========================================================= MC >=10.3.1a B+ (10^6 events) B0 (10^6 events) ========================================================= 2000 22.2 22.2 2001 34.6 37.3 2002 56.6 54.7 --------------------------------------------------------- Total 113.4 114.2 ========================================================= The lumis for the data is 2000, 1900V 10.6/fb 2000, 1960V 9.6/fb 2001, 1930V 35.6/fb 2002, 1930V 25.6/fb This amounts to 81.4/fb (on resonance), which I take to imply 90x10^6 BB pairs. The lumis are in a ratio of 1/1/3.5/2.5 or (in integers) 2/2/7/5. I do not understand Concezio's > Luminosity ratios: 2:1:6:3 >From this one can see that currently we have too much 2002 MC. The 2000 data should always be split 1:1 into 1900 and 1960 conditions. If we want to o replace the runs with <10.3.1a o have 3x data statistics in MC we would need an additional 42x10^6 BBbar events: ========================================================= new MC B+ (10^6 events) B0 (10^6 events) ========================================================= 2000 8.5 8.5 2001 12.5 12.5 --------------------------------------------------------- In this minimal scenario the total sample is not properly lumi-mixed since we still have too much 2002 MC. This can be remedied with the following scenario (removing part of the 2002 MC): ========================================================= new MC B+ (10^6 events) B0 (10^6 events) ========================================================= 2000 11.0 11.0 2001 24.0 21.0 2002 -12 -10 --------------------------------------------------------- This would give a total sample of ========================================================= new MC B+ (10^6 events) B0 (10^6 events) ========================================================= 2000 33.2 32.2 2001 58.6 58.3 2002 44.6 44.7 --------------------------------------------------------- Total 136.4 135.2 which is quite close to the proper lumi-weighting. This is also quite close to the 60x10^6 events needed posted by Concezio. If we do not want to remove 2002 MC, we would need something along the lines of: ========================================================= new MC B+ (10^6 events) B0 (10^6 events) ========================================================= 2000 21.8 21.8 2001 43.4 40.7 --------------------------------------------------------- This picture will change somewhat with the additional 30x10^6 events to be swept tomorrow, but since I don't know how much of those will be BB, I cannot include them in my calculation at the moment. Since I am still a bit jet-lagged, I may have erred somewhere above. Cheers, --U.