* get the correct errors according to Thorndike
- currently in the reweighting we
- reweight according to mb and a in the shape function
- change the reso/non-reso fraction according to the changes
in both
shape function and perturbative corrections
- check the importance of the perturbative corrections
- apply a weight which is consistent, with a small change in the
perturbative ratio (mb=4.80+/-0.12 GeV) and a large range for the SF
parameters
* how can I convert the result from the Vcb paper (
4.645+/-0.063 ) into something I can use here?
* theoretical studies for mx, Q^2 analysis and shape function parameters
measurement
- compare the fraction of events in a given Q^2 Mx region between
our inclusive MC and Bauer et al. Utilizing mb=4.8 GeV I get
Q^2> M<x fraction fraction Bauer et al.
6 1.86 48.6% 46.0 %
8 1.7 32.7% 35.9 %
11 1.5 21.0% 18.2 %
I have not yet applied the mb^5 correction because it is unclear to me
which mb I need to use, but it looks like this correction would at most
pull the result further off. Is the discrepancy acceptable? Is that
intrinsic of the fact that the MC model doesn't hold as it was said?
- see the impact of exclusive decays on all this. Should we cut at
mx> threshold?
- use several shape functions and see the impact on the shapes and
consequently the measurement
