 |
 |
Antonio - I had a quick look at VVF and recoilDSys and I think you are right, we seem to swap D1 and D*2 in an inconsistent way... Thanks for spotting this! Roberto - I think this bug is older, if I am not mistaken this already existed in CM1. Yes, I just checked the CM1 code, we have Gvxbtyp=4 for D*2 and 5 for D1 in there already. Maybe the best place to fix this would be directly in recoilDSys.cc, we fix it consistently for all the old ntuples then, too. Cheers, Kerstin On Mon, 21 May 2007, Roberto Sacco wrote: > Ciao Antonio, > > I believe there are no intermidiate steps, and the two reweighting are swapped in > the present code. This may have been the case for quite a few years, as I modeled > the RecoilMCutils lines you quote on the old CM1 code (I may of course have > introduced this bug myself...). > > Given that the production is made, I think it's best to correct this bug at VVF level. > > Thanks for spotting this! > > Cheers, > > Roberto > > Antonio Petrella wrote: > > Hi all, > > I think I have found an inconstiency in the way we get and use the > > weight for B decays in VVF. > > > > In recoilDsys ctor we initialize the B->D BF in a vector using this > > order (as by the comment) > > > > 0 = B-> X_c lnu > > 1 = B-> D l nu > > 2 = B-> D* l nu > > 3 = Not used > > 4 = D1 l nu > > 5 = D2* l nu > > > > we do this for the existing measurements and for generation values. > > Then we compute the weights as ratio of measurement/generation value. > > > > The way we use these weights in VVF is via recoilDsys::weight(int bmode) > > function, where bmode is actually the variable Gvxbtyp in our MC ntuples. > > > > I've had a look in BRecoilTools/RecoilMCUtil.cc and from there it seems > > to me that when Gvxbtyp=4 we have actually a B->D2* l nu decay (not a > > D1 l nu decay, that is the weight picked up by recoilDsys::weight(int > > bmode) function) and when Gvxbtyp=5 we have a B->D1 l nu decay. > > > > Are there intermediate steps that I'm missing somewhere or are the two > > weights for D1 and D*2 switched? > > > > Thank you, > > Antonio > >