 |
 |
Hi guys, This is correct: when computing the error from the resonant states, I increased the number of non-resonant states to keep the total B->Xulnu BF set to the nominal value. Hence, you will have to apply an additional weight on top of the hybrid weights to get the right contribution from non-resonant. Cheers, Dominique > That is not the case unfortunately. Daniele and I had a phone conversation > with Dominique a few weeks ago on this matter. When we manually vary an > exclusive BF, we have to compensate in the weighting of the non-res such that > the total assumed BF of the signal MC remains constant. I.e. lower an excl > BF -> increase the non-res contribution. As a result, for the CM1 MC, I have > the proper weight files for all of the various exclusive BF systematic > studies. If anyone wants them, email me. > > I don't know if Dominique is subscribed to vub-recoil - so i added him to the > email at this level. > > Cheers, > Ed > > On Wednesday 08 June 2005 01:42 am, Concezio Bozzi wrote: > > Hi Wolfgang, > > > > >I think the corrections factor should be (I left my notes in the office) > > > > > > N_h BF_new > > > k = ---- * ---------------- > > > N_r BF_res+BF_nonres > > > > after discussions with Ed/Daniele I had assumed this "magic factor" had > > to be set once for all for the default and that the reweighting file > > would have taken care of the variations of the exclusive BF > > automatically. So we did not recompute it for the systematic studies of > > the exclusive BF. > > > > Concezio. >