 |
 |
done On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Riccardo Faccini wrote: > 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 > > > > > > > > > > >