 |
 |
Ciao Daniele, could you post this in the review-HN in order to accelerate the review process? thanks ric On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Daniele del Re wrote: > > Hi all, > > as discussed at the meeting I performed the systematics due to the > exclusive b->ulnu BRs varying separately the pilnu and the rholnu > contributions instead of varying all the exclusive components of the same > relative amount. > > These are the results: > > test BRBR > > BR(B0->pi+lnu) +30% && BR(B+->pi0lnu) +30% - 1.7% > > BR(B0->pi+lnu) -30% && BR(B+->pi0lnu) -30% + 2.0% > > BR(B0->rho+lnu) +30% && BR(B+->rho0,omegalnu) +30% - 0.5% > > BR(B0->rho+lnu) -30% && BR(B+->rho0,omegalnu) -30% + 0.8% > > BR(B->pilnu) +30% && BR(B->rholnu) +30% - 2.5% > > BR(B->pilnu) -30% && BR(B->rholnu) -30% - 2.8% > > > as a crosscheck I tried to remove all the remaining exclusive compenent > (not yet observed decay modes) > > BR(B->Xlnu (not pi and rho) -100% - 5.8% > > > and it seems to go in the opposite direction but explanes why the > hybrid and the non resonant model give then similar results (something > like a compensation). Quoting this difference as systematics probably > would be too conservative since it implies that we don't use at the > theoretical information about eta, eta' , a1, b1 , f1 lnu decays. > > > I propose to quote a simmetric syst uncertainty of 2.6%. Together with > the systematics due to the fit using the pure non resonant model it gives > us a systematics of ~4% that would be conservative. > > > Daniele > > > > >