Hi Kerstin, Kerstin Tackmann wrote: > Hi Wolfgang, > >> There are two ways out. Either we switch to release 18 MC/SP8 which will >> have better D** description, better other things, but we have to adjust >> a lot of (more or less hard) coded numbers. But it will also solve the >> SP5/SP6 difference for the signal MC. We have to calculate new weights >> and magic factors. The other way is to apply some reweigting for SP5 to >> get the same as SP6. >> >> Kerstin, haven't you produced something for this? Which we are not using >> at the moment? > > I am not quite sure I understand your question correctly. I'll try > different interpretations - if you meant neither, let me know.... > > a) As Heiko already said, reweighting the D** in SP5 to get the improved > description in SP6 is not really possible, because the low mD** are simply > not populated in SP5, so there is nothing we could reweight. > This was my question. Thanks, Wolfgang > b) We are using some reweighting to adjust the ratio of SP5/SP6 in the > nonres and resonant signal MC and so that it corresponds to the ratio of > Run1-3/Run4. This is what you mention in a later email. > This is only for signal MC at this point, though (and when we introduced > this, the magic k numbers where adjusted accordingly). > > c) We have not yet looked at any reweighting of SP5/SP6 for the generic MC > to account for differences in overall normalization as far as I know. > > Cheers, > Kerstin > -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wolfgang Menges Queen Mary, University of London SLAC, MS 35 Mile End Road 2575 Sand Hill Road London, E1 4NS, UK Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA +44 20 7882 3753 ++1 650 926 8503 [log in to unmask] ------------------------------------------------------------------------