 |
 |
Hi Ric, I had a look at these variables in the 2000 file. For the pur, the differences are below 0.1 for both charged and neutral B and for intpur the differences are between 35 and 40 for neutral B and between 55 and 60 for charged B. Does this make sense? Thanks, Kerstin On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Riccardo Faccini wrote: > Hi Kerstin, > my bet is that the differences are due to small fixes to the semiexcl > algorithm that were done in time. The differences should concentrate at > low purities. can you please compare the purB0 and intpurB0 (and ChB > correspondingly) distributions to see where the differences are ? > they do no more look worrisome to me > ciao > ric > > ______________________________________________________ > Riccardo Faccini > Universita' "La Sapienza" & I.N.F.N. Roma > tel +39/06/49914798 Fax.: +39/06/4957697 > http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~rfaccini > Univ. La Sapienza. 2,Ple Aldo Moro, I-00185 Roma Dipartimento di Fisica > > "I don't understand what you say, but I believe I disagree" W.D. > > On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Kerstin Tackmann wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > after correcting the pidtables link we are still seing small differences > > for the 2000 file: 925 overall entries instead of 926, 644 entries in > > modeB0 instead of 632 and 615 entries in modeChB instead of 618. > > > > What might these differences be due to? Could these result from different > > random number seeds for the pid killing? > > > > Do I have to adjust the tables link for the tracking efficiency as well? > > > > Thanks, > > Kerstin > > > > >