1 / 20

Miscellaneous W mass studies

Miscellaneous W mass studies. Comment on V.1681 result Muon Error test Different Estimators for the 4q channel CR and Cones. V1.681 semileptonic results updated. One faulty CN at 189 discovered Differences at 189: All energies Electron -23 -6 MeV

zudora
Download Presentation

Miscellaneous W mass studies

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Miscellaneous W mass studies Comment on V.1681 result Muon Error test Different Estimators for the 4q channel CR and Cones

  2. V1.681 semileptonic results updated • One faulty CN at 189 discovered • Differences at 189: All energies Electron -23-6 MeV Muon +8+1 MeV Tau +4+3 MeV • CN has been redone (also V1.69 is OK) A.Moutoussi Cern

  3. Muon Error test • Roberto had suggested to “move” MC distribution of 2C error to match the data • Applied shift of 5% -9 MeV shift (-19MeV if ChiProb>0.01)_ A.Moutoussi Cern

  4. Different Estimators for 4quark 3d. • Two options:Error from 5C fit (err5c) Neural Net output (NN) Two considerations: Expected error on Mw Expected error DMw (durham-cone)_ Err5c 52 52 NN 51 51 (all energies combined, errors using 4f, for the extreme cone R=0.4) ~2% gain both for Mw andDMw A.Moutoussi Cern

  5. What do Err5c and NN know about Mw and its resolution. (Mtrue1+Mtrue2-2*M5C) Resolution For 3 Err5c and 3 NN bins A.Moutoussi Cern

  6. Mw Resolution: Mean and Width vs Err5C vs NN A.Moutoussi Cern

  7. Cones and CR • Compare Expected Chis2 sensitivity for two Pairing options Allowing pairing algorithm choice (FreePair) Keeping pairing as in Durham Reco(XPair) • Expected sensitivity for SK1 • Systematics? A.Moutoussi Cern

  8. Cones and CR -details- • V1.69 (correct treatment of ISR events) • NN used as 3d • 500K CC03 events used to calculate expected errors and correlations • Bakgrounds used in all MC tests (expected errors, correlations, etc) • Minos errors • Correlations calculated every year, averaged and the spread taken as their error A.Moutoussi Cern

  9. Cones and CR –FreePair vs Xpair- Sensitivity determined by CR shift from Std to Cone Error on difference Free Pair Xpair Dmw e.g ki=2,ki=100 219, 55 219, 55 Correlation 0.646 ±0.012 0.696 ± 0.012 Error on Dmw51 48 ~6% gain for Dmwfor the same CR shift expected A.Moutoussi Cern

  10. Cones and CR -X sensitivity vs R- Without systematics, tighest cone has largest sensitivity (as in all previous CN versions!) A.Moutoussi Cern

  11. Cones and CR -C for FPair vs XPair- Expected X for For the tightest cone R=0.4 Xpair FreePair Xpair more sensitive Higher sensitivity increases with Ki Point where X increases by one after more K points included! But ~1.4 A.Moutoussi Cern

  12. Cones and CR -Data and Xpair- Data Flat.. no sign of CR A.Moutoussi Cern

  13. Cones and CR -and systematics?- • One can/should check the obvious: Jetset-Herwig, Ariadne, vs Cone(eg plots on www) FJN-FJ vs cone(eg FJ-Standard OLD CN version) • or/and some more.. • eg Jet Mass Data-Mc vs Cone A.Moutoussi Cern

  14. Pcut Cone Eflow Eflow Eflow-Eo Eflow-Eo FEBRUARY 2002 Actual Masses:Cone Definition & Jet Energy Corrections 100MeV -100MeV NOW Ann Moutoussi, CERN

  15. PS: the W masses v.1682 (Std EFLOW) • V1.682 V1.681 Electron 80.632 ±.079 80.542±.087 Muon ... Tau 80.341 ±.110 80.342±.122 4Quark 80.513 ±.049 80.476±.054 A.Moutoussi Cern

  16. Cones and CR -systematics- • Bose-Einstein vs Cone But BEall is disfavoured, idea was to “extrapolate” l and DMw And we use Cone variation?.. -32MeV A.Moutoussi Cern

  17. Cones and CR -and systematics?- • All depends how we will evaluate them for standard analysis anyway. • Might influence the choice of Cut used for CR? (it did in the past..) A.Moutoussi Cern

  18. Cones and CR -conclusions- • Some sensitivity improvements by using NN and Xpair • Tightest cone has largest sensitivity (without systematics), limit of k~1.4 • Data flat • Need to define how we add systematics A.Moutoussi Cern

  19. Cones and CR -and systematics?- 0.100 0.100 A.Moutoussi Cern

  20. Cones and CR -and systematics?- A.Moutoussi Cern

More Related