 |
 |
Hi Kerstin, you are right, the wrong data chains were used... I just reproduced the plots and the web page. The agreement for CT is much better now :) Please have a look at http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~sacco/thecomparison/tracking/comparelists.html for the updated plots. Thanks for spotting it! Roberto On 20 Mar 2008, at 21:08, Kerstin Tackmann wrote: > > Hi Roberto, > > this is interesting. I have one question, though: Comparing the data > histograms for the various variables for the different track lists, > it looks like they are identical, i.e. the data distributions do not > seem to change when using different track lists. This seems unlikely > (especially as the MC histos change when changing the track list). > Could there be have been a typo in either the data-MC comparison > setup (causing the same data ntuples to be used for the three sets) > or in the ntuple production (i.e. the track lists were the same for > data)? > > All the best, > Kerstin > > On Wed, 19 Mar 2008, Roberto Sacco wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> to understand the effect of different track lists in input to >> VubRecoilUser, I produced a web page with run3 data/MC comparison >> plots side by side. You can access it here: >> http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~sacco/thecomparison/tracking/comparelists.html >> >> All the best, >> >> Roberto