Introduction Analysis Results Conclusions Frascati 12 March 2008 Status of analysis F. Ambrosino T....

Introduction Analysis Results Conclusions

Frascati 12 March 2008

Status of analysis

F. Ambrosino T. Capussela F. Perfetto

Status of analysis

Status of analysisFrascati 12 March 2008

Outline

Repeat the analysis with mass constraint before photon’s pairing

Review the correction to the photon efficiency

Look at Data /MC comparison for min2

Sample selection

OLD approach:

7 and only 7 pnc with 21° < < 159° and E > 10 MeV > 18° Kin Fit with no mass constraint P(2) > 0.01 320 MeV < Erad < 400 MeV AFTER PHOTON’S PAIRINGKinematic Fit with and mass

constraints (on DATA M=547.822

MeV/c2 )

NEW approach:

7 and only 7 pnc with 21° < < 159° and E > 10 MeV > 18° Kin Fit with mass constraint

(on DATA M= 547.822 MeV/c2 ) P(2) > 0.01 320 MeV < Erad < 400 MeV AFTER PHOTON’S PAIRINGKinematic Fit with mass constraint

OLD - NEW

Using the same cuts on min and

Pur 75.4%

Pur 84.5%

Pur 92%

Pur 94.8%

Pur 97.6%

Pur 82.2%

Pur 99%

Pur 98%

Pur 96.3%

Pur 91%

Low purity

Medium I purity

Medium II purity

Medium III purity

High purity

OLD - NEW

The slope in the efficiency shapes

Low purity

Medium I purity

Medium II purity

Medium III purity

High purity

OLD - NEW

RMS = 0.1169

RMS = 0.1632

Efficiency

Correction to the photon efficiency is applied weighting the Montecarloevents for the Data/MC photon efficiency ratio ≈ 1 exp(E/8.1)

Efficiency (I)

Low purity

Medium II purity

High purity

P1 = 0.001258

P1 = 0.001692

P1 = 0.002014 P1 = 0.001876

P1 = 0.001601

P1 = 0.001623

Photons pairing

Recoil is the most energetic cluster.In order to match every couple of photon to the right 0 we build a 2-like variable for each of the 15 combinations:

is the invariant mass of i0 for j-th combination

= 134.98 MeV

is obtained as function of photon energies

Energy resolution

EEp1 1 e

Data – MC RMS

A data MC discrepancy at level of 12 % is observed.

A further check can be done comparing the energies of the two photons in the pion rest frame as function of pion energy

Conclusions

We are ready to fit and to evaluate the systematical errors in the NEW approach.

We have to resolve the Data MC discrepancy onmin

Dalitz plot analysis of with the KLOE experimentFrascati 19 Luglio 2007

3in chiral theory

A s,t,u 1

2 mK2 M s,t,u

( 3 ) A2 Q 4

M (s,t,u)3s 4m

2Q2 ms

md2 mu

The decay occours primarily on account of the d-uquark mass differences and the result arising from lowestorder chiral perturbation theory is well known:

A good understanding of M(s,t,u) can in principle lead to a very accurate determination of Q:

And, at l.o.

m 3m 0i1

The dynamics of the decay can be studied analysing the Dalitz plot distribution.

The Dalitz plot density ( |A|2 ) is specified by a single quadratic slope :

|A|2 1 + 2z

Ei = Energy of the i-th pion in the rest frame. = Distance to the center of Dalitz plot.max = Maximun value of .

Z [ 0 , 1 ]

Dalitz plot expansion

Introduction Theoretical tools Results Conclusions

Dalitz plot expansion

Dalitz expansion: theory vs experiment

Calculation Tree

One-loop[1]

Dispersive[2]

Tree dispersive

Absolute dispersive

Unitary[3]

0.0015

0.007 0.014

0.031 [1] Gasser,J. and Leutwyler, H., Nucl. Phys. B 250, 539 (1985) [2] Kambor, J., Wiesendanger, C. and Wyler, D., Nucl. Phys. B 465, 215 (1996) [3] Borosoy B., Niler R. hep-ph/0510384 v2 (2005)

Alde (1984) 0.022 ± 0.023

Crystal Barrel (1998) 0.052 ± 0.020

Crystal Ball (2001) 0.031 ± 0.004

Sample selection

The cuts used to select: 000are:

7 and only 7 prompt neutral clusters with 21° < <

and E > 10 MeV Opening angle between each couple of photons > 18° Kinematic Fit with no mass constraint P(2) > 0.01 320 MeV < Erad < 400 MeV (after kin fit)

The overall common selection efficiency (trigger, reconstruction, EVCL) is = (30.30 0.01)%With these cuts the expected contribution from events other than the signal is < 0.1%

Sample selection

Photons pairing

Recoil is the most energetic cluster.In order to match every couple of photon to the right 0 we build a 2-like variable for each of the 15 combinations:

is the invariant mass of i0 for j-th combination

= 134.98 MeV

is obtained as function of photon energies

Energy resolution

EEp1 1 e

Matching to s

Cutting on: Minimum 2 value 2 between “best” and “second” combination

One can obtain samples with different purity-efficiency

Purity = Fraction of events with all photons correctly matched to 0’s

Samples

Pur 84.5% Eff 22 %Pur 92 % Eff 13.6 %

Pur 94.8% Eff 9.2 %

Pur 97.6% Eff 4.3 %

Low purity

High purity

Medium purity III

Medium purity II

Pur 75.4% Eff 30.3 %

Medium purity I 2 < 10

2 > 1.2

No cut on 2 and 2

Efficiency

Low purity

Efficiency

Medium II purity

Efficiency

High purity

ReconstructedPhase space

The problem of resolution

Low Purity High Purity

Second kinematic fit

Once a combination has been selected, one can do a second kinematic fit imposing 0 mass for each couple of photons.

Fit procedure

ni log i i

We obtain an extimate by minimizingThe fit is done using a binned likelihood approach

Where:

ni = recostructed eventsi = for each MC event (according pure phase space):

Evaluate its ztrue and its zrec (if any!) Enter an histogram with the value of zrec

Weight the entry with 1 + 2 ztrue Weight the event with the fraction of combinatorial background, for the signal (bkg) if it has correct (wrong) pairing

Results on MC

We have tested the fit procedure on MC by generating samples with different values of the parameter and looking at the result of our fit for these samples:

Results on MC (Low Pur)

Fitted region (0,0.6)

Fitted region (0,1)

Results on MC (Medium II Pur)

Fitted region (0,1)

Results on MC (High Pur)

Fitted region (0,1)

Data sample

We have analyzed Lint = 418 pb1 of ee collisions collected in the 20012002 data taking period

N1 = 1.4179 0.0012 Mevts Low purity

N2 = 1.0292 0.0010 Mevts Medium I purity

N3 = 0.6459 0.0008 Mevts Medium II purity

N4 = 0.4453 0.0007 Mevts Medium III purity

N5 = 0.2123 0.0005 Mevts High purity

Analysis on data

Trying some more systematics checks on the fitting range we got in BIG trouble…

RangeLow

· 103

Medium I

· 103

Medium II

· 103

Medium III

· 103

High Pur

· 103

(0, 1) 18 ± 2 18 ± 2 18 ± 3 11 ± 3 8 ± 4

(0, 0.7) 31 ± 3 30 ± 2 26 ± 3 18 ± 4 18 ± 6

Linearity of DATA / MC ratio

Check linearity of DATA/MCreco using for MC pure phase space…

Nothing really strange @ high purity…

Linearity of DATA / MC ratio (II)

Idea: check linearity of DATA/MCreco using for MC pure phase space… But @ low purity = High statistics…

A possible explanation_

The edge of the flat part of the phase space depends in the value of the eta mass. What if its value on data is larger than the nominal one ?

A toy MC

To understand the effect we used a toy MC to generate 1200000 events with different eta masses:

Sample 1 : M = 547.30 MeVSample 2 : M = 547.822 MeV We observe that when the input mass value is used to build “z” variable the phase space shape does not change. But if one uses M = 547.30 MeV to build the “z” variable for sample 2 big deviations are observed……..

m 3m 0i1

Z2(547.8)/Z1(547.3)

A toy MC

To understand the effect we used a toy MC to generate 1200000 events with different eta masses:

Sample 1 : M = 547.30 MeVSample 2 : M = 547.822 MeV We observe that when the input mass value is used to build “z” variable the phase space shape does not change. But if one uses M = 547.30 MeV to build the “z” variable for sample 2 big deviations are observed……..

m 3m 0i1

Z2(547.8)/Z1(547.3)Z2(547.3)/Z1(547.3)

LinearityIf the effect is given by the eta mass, correcting for it now all sample should exhibit good linearity for the ratio DATA/MCrec (phase space)

@ Low purity

Linearity (II)If the effect is given by the eta mass, correcting for it now all sample should exhibit good linearity for the ratio DATA/MCrec (phase space)

@ High purity

Results on data

Let us look at what happens now…

Range Low

· 103

Medium I

· 103

Medium II

· 103

Medium III

· 103

High Pur

· 103

(0, 1) 33 ± 2 35 ± 2 33 ± 3 28 ± 3 25 ± 4

(0, 0.7) 33 ± 3

35 ± 3 32 ± 4 26 ± 4 25 ± 6

…..we gained greater stability with respect to the range and purity.

Third kinematic fit

We performed a kinematic fit constraining the mass

(M = 547.822 MeV)

RangeLow

· 103

Medium I

· 103

Medium II

· 103

Medium III

· 103

(0, 1) 30 ± 2 31 ± 2 31 ± 3 25 ± 3 26 ± 4

(0, 0.8) 26 ± 2 28 ± 2 28 ± 3 22 ± 4 22 ± 5

(0, 0.7) 26 ± 3 28 ± 3 27 ± 4 21 ± 4 23 ± 5

(0, 0.6) 30 ± 4 31 ± 4 31 ± 4 24 ± 5 20 ± 6

RangeLow

· 103

Medium I

· 103

Medium II

· 103

Medium III

· 103

(0, 1) 30 ± 2 31 ± 2 31 ± 3 25 ± 3 26 ± 4

(0, 0.8) 26 ± 2 28 ± 2 28 ± 3 22 ± 4 22 ± 5

(0, 0.7) 26 ± 3 28 ± 3 27 ± 4 21 ± 4 23 ± 5

(0, 0.6) 30 ± 4 31 ± 4 31 ± 4 24 ± 5 20 ± 6

The systematic check

This procedure relies heavily on MC.

The crucial checks for the analysis can be summarizedin three main questions:

I. Is MC correctly describing efficiencies ?II. Is MC correctly describing resolutions ?III. Is MC correctly estimating the “background” ?

Efficiency (I)

Low purity

Medium II purity

High purity

Efficiency (II)

Further check is to look at the relative ratio between the different samples:

N2/N1 exp. = .7263 ± .0002

N3/N1 exp. = .4497 ± .0002

N4/N1 exp. = .3048 ± .0002

N5/N1 exp. = .1431 ± .0001

N2/N1 obs = .7258 ± 0.0004

N3/N1 obs. = .4556 ± 0.0004

N4/N1 obs. = .3140 ± 0.0004

N5/N1 obs. = .1498 ± 0.0003

Efficiency (III)

Resolution (I)

A first check on resolution is from pion mass distribution

Resolution (II)

The center of Dalitz plot correspond to 3 pions with the same energy (Ei = M/3 = 182.4 MeV). A good check of the MC performance in evaluating the energy resolution of 0 comes from the distribution of E0 Ei for z = 0

Resolution (III)

Resolution (IV)

A data MC discrepancy at level of 12 % is observed.Thus we fit filling a histo with: z’rec = zgen + (zrec zgen ).

Fitting the combinatorial backgroundIdea, try to fit background composition on DATA.To check procedure, we fit background composition on MC:

Background fraction (MC) = 15.5 %Background fraction (MC fit) = (15.5 ± 0.2) %

Fitting the combinatorial background (II)

On DATA:

Background fraction (MC) = 15.5 %Background fraction (DATA) = (16.6 ± 0.28) %

Background fraction (MC) = 24.6 % Background fraction (DATA) = (26.45 ± 0.26) %

Background

Background composition, Medium II purity sample

Systematic uncertainties

EffectLow

· 103

Medium I

· 103

Medium II

· 103

Medium III

· 103

Res 9 6 4 3 3

Low E 1.6 1.9 1.6 1.3 1.4

Bkg 0. 0. 0. 1 1 +1

M 1 1 2 2 5

Range 4 3 4 4 3 +3

Purity 2 +5 +7 1 + 6 7 5 + 2

Tot 10 + 5 7 + 7 6 + 6 9 9 + 4

We take as milestone, for each sample, the fit in the range (0, 0.7)

Results

We give the final results for the slope parameter in corrispondence of the sample with 92% of purity:

This result is compatible with the published Crystal Ball result:

= 0.031 ± 0.004

And the calculations from the chiral unitary approach.

= 0.027 ± 0.004stat ± 0.006 syst

Fit residual

2/ndf = 13.72 / 17.

Effect of mass constraint in fit

Why did this effect not pop up in other experiments analyses? The reason is the effect is much less evident if you constrain in a kinematic fit the mass and then use the value you have constrainedd to build z….

Conclusions

If you bless this preliminary result we are ready to prepare a brief paper for LP07.

Otherwise…… . The MEMO is ready and Giorgio already gave

us his comments (This talk is partially upgrade one.)

Next step: to perform the kinematic fit imposing mass before the photon pairing, as asked by Giorgio.

And then? ……THE END!!!!!!!

Efficiency I

Medium I purity

Efficiency

Medium III purity

Results on MC (Medium I Pur)

Fitted region (0,1)

Results on MC (Medium III Pur)

Fitted region (0,1)

DATA MC comparison

Outline

@ KLOE

At KLOE is produced in the process .N(2001-2002) 17 Mevts. The final state for is 7, with almost no physical background.

BR() = 3.910-3

Introduction Analysis Results Conclusions Frascati 12 March 2008 Status of analysis F. Ambrosino T....

Documents

Statistical study of non-reconnection plasma jets as observed by the DOUBLE STAR spacecraft E. Amata 1, S. Savin 2, D. Ambrosino 1, L. Trenchi 1, M.F

FINAL WORKSHOP OF GRID PROJECTS, ”PON · PDF fileF. AMBROSINO AND A. FUNEL: OPENFOAM AND FLUENT FEATURES IN CFD SIMULATIONS ON CRESCO HPC SYSTEM Pa. The ﬂow is

Actuarial Analysis Actuarial Analysis Actuarial Analysis Actuarial Analysis Actuarial ... · 2016-06-27 · Actuarial Analysis Actuarial Analysis Actuarial Analysis Actuarial Analysis

By: Luca Ambrosino & Mohammad Karimiyan

Plant species identity and richness influence microbial ... · Citation: Cardillo DS, Busso CA, Ambrosino ML, et al. Plant species identity and richness influence microbial respiration

NON INVASIVE VENTILATION and BEYOND · 13.30 COPD exacerbation Nicolino Ambrosino (Pisa, I) 14.00 Community acquired pneumonia Pierluigi Viale (Bologna, I) 14.30 ARDS and Sepsis Stylianos

Dewi Nurul Makhabah, Nicolino Ambrosino fileMechanically-ventilated patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) may suffer from retained secretions from several causes. Airway clearance

Frascati 14 May 2008 Status of analysis F. Ambrosino T. Capussela F. Perfetto Status of analysis

· Editor Giorgio Ambrosino MemEx, Italy giorgio.ambrosino@memexitaly.it Download at Document responsible MemEx srl, Italy Layout by Stefano Seghetti, Italy stefano

RACIAL EQUITY ACTION PLAN TEMPLATE PHASE 1€¦ · 2020-12-23 · Mayank Patel, Poll Worker Division Manager Norma Agustin, Payroll and Personnel Assistant Tisa Ambrosino, Ballot

Implementing ITS for BRT: considerations and …...1 Giorgio Ambrosino, Saverio Gini MemEx, Livorno (Italy) [Webinar] BRT Planning 701: Technology Implementing ITS for BRT: considerations

GIOIELLI DI CUOIO CON PERLINEGrafica: Elizabeth Healey Fotografie procedimenti: Guy Ambrosino Fotografie progetti: Emma Robinson Indice analitico: Diana LeCore Direttore creativo:

Re-Elect Ed Ambrosino

Apellido, nombres Tipo Documento Nro. Documento · PDF filealvarez pozo, marcela paz dni 95144553 alvarez pringles, ana paula dni 35475254 amaya, ignacio ezequiel dni 36430512 ambrosino,

Basic Elements Environmental Analysis –Customer Analysis –Competitor Analysis –Channel Analysis –Company Internal Analysis –Public Policy Analysis

Reaching the Latino Community in Colorado Betsy Ambrosino, Bilingual Senior Coordinator Cooking Matters Colorado

Camilla Di Donato & Fabio Ambrosino

Manual of Psychiatric Care for the Medically Illdocshare01.docshare.tips/files/2614/26140929.pdfManual of Psychiatric Care for the Medically Ill Edited by Antoinette Ambrosino Wyszynski,

SENSORY ANALYSIS AS A TOOL TO CHARACTERIZE HIGH QUALITY OLIVE OILS Maria Luisa Ambrosino asa@analistisensoriali.com +39 348 7352738; +39 081 5563368

UTSA Tuition Proposal Draft1 · President, and Dr. Rosalie Ambrosino, Vice President of Student Affairs. Five administrators also participate in committee deliberations as ex officio