16
K K L +

K K L +. + component, ME + component, LE Difference

  • View
    230

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

KKL

+

+ component, ME+ component, LE

Difference

Nubar-PID performance on L100200

So carried out idea…

L010185 L100200

datarw-MC

datarw-MC

data and MC

rw-MC (L100200-L010185) data (L100200-L010185)

(no +), LE (no +), ME

ratio

diff

L010185 and L100200 MC

(reweighed)

1st try: fit the ME-LE data with the following function:

LEME vparLEvparMEf

MEv

LEv

Simple chi-squared used for the fit:

bins

LEMEDATA parLEparMEvvfLEME2

2,,,

222

)( MELEDATA vparMEvparLELEME

where:

1st check: Fit for (ME-LE)MC after correcting for ME,LE differences with the MC:

ME-LE, no + (MC)

parMEv ME parLEv LE

(ME-LE)MC

Fit

parME and parLE indeed converge at 1.0

2nd check: Fit for (ME-LE)MC assuming no ME,LE differences besides +:

parLE = 0.728±0.591parME= 1.303±0.297

Fit values:

71.242 Fit80.262 ini

(ME-LE)MC

Fit

parLEv LE parMEv ME

Now fit for (ME-LE)DATA assuming no ME,LE differences besides +:

parLE = 2.623±0.847parME= 0.703±0.436

Fit values:

42.202 Fit68.262 ini

parLEv LE parMEv ME

(ME-LE)DATA

Fit

Fit (ME-LE)MC again with less bins:

parLE = 0.195±0.587parME= 1.015±0.290

Fit values:

39.92 Fit39.112 ini

parLEv LE parMEv ME

(ME-LE)MC

Fit

parLE = 1.793±0.861parME= 0.477±0.431

Fit values:

17.72 Fit24.112 ini

(ME-LE)MC

Fit

parLEv LE parMEv ME

Fit (ME-LE)DATA again with less bins:

BACKUP