Difference: JetEtmissJetPerformanceforHighLuminosity (1 vs. 3)

Revision 32012-07-20 - SabrinaSacerdoti

Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="JetEtMissPublicResults"
AtlasPublicTopicHeader.png
Line: 10 to 10
 

Introduction

<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Changed:
<
<
[Mean number of pile-up jets vs mean number of interactions] The mean number of pile-up jets within |\eta| < 2.1 that pass various cuts on the reconstructed LCW-scale jet pT, versus the mean number of pile-up interactions per bunch crossing (< \mu >). A correction, dependent on the number of reconstructed primary vertices and <mu>, was applied to the jets in order to subtract the average pT offset induced by pile-up. A power law was used to extrapolate the pile-up jet multiplicity to <mu> = 150. Since these extrapolations are based on only two data points each, there is a very large uncertainty in the extrapolated pile-up jet multiplicity.
>
>
[Mean number of pile-up jets vs mean number of interactions] The mean number of pile-up jets within |η| < 2.1 that pass various cuts on the reconstructed LCW-scale jet pT, versus the mean number of pile-up interactions per bunch crossing (< μ >). A correction, dependent on the number of reconstructed primary vertices and <μ>, was applied to the jets in order to subtract the average pT offset induced by pile-up. A power law was used to extrapolate the pile-up jet multiplicity to <μ> = 150. Since these extrapolations are based on only two data points each, there is a very large uncertainty in the extrapolated pile-up jet multiplicity.
  eps file gif file
Changed:
<
<
>
>
 
<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Line: 20 to 19
 
<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->

<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Deleted:
<
<
 
[Mean number of pile-up jets vs mean number of interactions]
Changed:
<
<
The mean number of pile-up jets within |\eta| < 2.1 that pass various cuts on the reconstructed LCW-scale jet pT, versus the mean number of pile-up interactions per bunch crossing (). In addition to applying the average offset correction, these jets were required to match hard-scatter track jets of pT > 5 GeV (track-jet confirmed), which rejects a large fraction of pile-up jets. A power law was used to extrapolate the pile-up jet multi plicity to = 150. Since these extrapolations are based on only two data points each, there is a very large uncertainty in the extrapolated pile-up jet multiplicity
>
>
The mean number of pile-up jets within |η| < 2.1 that pass various cuts on the reconstructed LCW-scale jet pT, versus the mean number of pile-up interactions per bunch crossing (< μ >). In addition to applying the average offset correction, these jets were required to match hard-scatter track jets of pT > 5 GeV (track-jet confirmed), which rejects a large fraction of pile-up jets. A power law was used to extrapolate the pile-up jet multi plicity to <μ> = 150. Since these extrapolations are based on only two data points each, there is a very large uncertainty in the extrapolated pile-up jet multiplicity.
  eps file gif file
Changed:
<
<
>
>
 
<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Line: 32 to 30
 
<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->

<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Deleted:
<
<
 
[Pt cut vs pile-up jet multiplicity]
Changed:
<
<
The minimum LCW-scale pT cut versus pile-up jet multiplicity extrapolated to = 150. The data points are fit using an inverse power law. If an analysis requires fewer than 10\% of events to contain one or more pile-up jets, then a minimum pT of approximately 45 GeV would be necessary in the absence of track-jet confirmation. By using track-jet confirmation, it is possible to lower the minimum pT to approximately 25 GeV.
>
>
The minimum LCW-scale pT cut versus pile-up jet multiplicity extrapolated to <μ> = 150. The data points are fit using an inverse power law. If an analysis requires fewer than 10 % of events to contain one or more pile-up jets, then a minimum pT of approximately 45 GeV would be necessary in the absence of track-jet confirmation. By using track-jet confirmation, it is possible to lower the minimum pT to approximately 25 GeV.
  eps file gif file
Changed:
<
<
>
>
 
<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Line: 44 to 41
 
<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->

<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Deleted:
<
<
 
[Jet resolution vs pt]
Changed:
<
<
The jet energy resolution (sigmapT/pT) measured for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 within |eta|<0.8, versus the true jet pT, in the EM+JES calibration. The data points are fit with the function sigmapT/pT = sqrt{N2/pT^2 + S^2/pT + C^2, where N, S and C are the noise, stochastic and constant terms in the resolution. The resolution is measured for samples with different values of , the mean number of pile-up interactions per bunch crossing. The noise term increases with , while the fitted value for S is constant within errors and C is kept fixed to its value for = 0.
>
>
The jet energy resolution (σ(pT)/pT) measured for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 within |η|<0.8, versus the true jet pT, in the EM+JES calibration. The data points are fit with the function σ(pT)/pT = √(N^2 /pT^2+ S^2/pT + C^2), where N, S and C are the noise, stochastic and constant terms in the resolution. The resolution is measured for samples with different values of <μ>, the mean number of pile-up interactions per bunch crossing. The noise term increases with <μ> , while the fitted value for S is constant within errors and C is kept fixed to its value for <μ> = 0.
  eps file gif file
Changed:
<
<
>
>
 
<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Line: 56 to 52
 
<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->

<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Deleted:
<
<
 
[Noise term vs mu]
Changed:
<
<
Noise term (N) of the jet energy resolution versus the mean number of pile-up interactions per bunch crossing (). N is obtained from the fits to the jet energy resolution measured on anti-kt jets of R = 0.4 within |\eta|<0.8 in the EM+JES calibration. The value of N is reduced by applying the jet areas correction. A linear fit is used to extrapolate the value of N to <\mu> = 150, which is 14 GeV for the average offset and 8 GeV when the jet areas correction is applied.
>
>
Noise term (N) of the jet energy resolution versus the mean number of pile-up interactions per bunch crossing (<μ>). N is obtained from the fits to the jet energy resolution measured on anti-kt jets of R = 0.4 within |η|<0.8 in the EM+JES calibration. The value of N is reduced by applying the jet areas correction. A linear fit is used to extrapolate the value of N to <μ> = 150, which is 14 GeV for the average offset and 8 GeV when the jet areas correction is applied.
  eps file gif file
Changed:
<
<
>
>
 
<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->

Revision 22012-07-20 - SabrinaSacerdoti

Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="JetEtMissPublicResults"
AtlasPublicTopicHeader.png
Line: 10 to 10
 

Introduction

<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Deleted:
<
<
 
Changed:
<
<
[Mean number of pile-up jets vs mean number of interactions] The mean number of pile-up jets within |\eta| < 2.1 that pass various cuts on the reconstructed LCW-scale jet pT, versus the mean number of pile-up in teractions per bunch crossing (). A correction, dependent on the number of reconstructed primary vertices and , was applied to the jets in order to subtract the average pT offset induced by pile-up. A power law was used to extrapolate the pile-up jet multiplicity to = 150. Since these extrapolations are based on only two data points each, there is a very large uncertainty in the extrapolated pile-up jet multiplicity.
>
>
[Mean number of pile-up jets vs mean number of interactions] The mean number of pile-up jets within |\eta| < 2.1 that pass various cuts on the reconstructed LCW-scale jet pT, versus the mean number of pile-up interactions per bunch crossing (< \mu >). A correction, dependent on the number of reconstructed primary vertices and <mu>, was applied to the jets in order to subtract the average pT offset induced by pile-up. A power law was used to extrapolate the pile-up jet multiplicity to <mu> = 150. Since these extrapolations are based on only two data points each, there is a very large uncertainty in the extrapolated pile-up jet multiplicity.
 
Changed:
<
<
eps file gif file
>
>
eps file gif file
 
Changed:
<
<
>
>
 
Deleted:
<
<
 
<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Deleted:
<
<
 
<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Deleted:
<
<

[Mean number of pile-up jets vs mean number of interactions]
 
Changed:
<
<
The mean number of pile-up jets within |\eta| < 2.1 that pass various cuts on the reconstructed LCW-scale jet pT, versus the mean number of pile-up interactions per bunch crossing (). In addition to applying the average offset correction, these jets were required to match hard-scatter track jets of pT > 5 GeV (track-jet confirmed), which rejects a large fraction of pile-up jets. A power law was used to extrapolate the pile-up jet multi plicity to = 150. Since these extrapolations are based on only two data points each, there is a very large uncertainty in the extrapolated pile-up jet multiplicity
>
>
[Mean number of pile-up jets vs mean number of interactions]
 
Added:
>
>
The mean number of pile-up jets within |\eta| < 2.1 that pass various cuts on the reconstructed LCW-scale jet pT, versus the mean number of pile-up interactions per bunch crossing (). In addition to applying the average offset correction, these jets were required to match hard-scatter track jets of pT > 5 GeV (track-jet confirmed), which rejects a large fraction of pile-up jets. A power law was used to extrapolate the pile-up jet multi plicity to = 150. Since these extrapolations are based on only two data points each, there is a very large uncertainty in the extrapolated pile-up jet multiplicity
 
Changed:
<
<
eps file gif file
>
>
eps file gif file
 
Changed:
<
<
>
>
 
Deleted:
<
<
 
<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Deleted:
<
<
 
<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Deleted:
<
<

[Pt cut vs pile-up jet multiplicity]
 
Changed:
<
<
The minimum LCW-scale pT cut versus pile-up jet multiplicity extrapolated to = 150. The data points are fit using an inverse power law. If an analysis requires fewer than 10\% of events to contain one or more pile-up jets, then a minimum pT of approximately 45 GeV would be necessary in the absence of track-jet confirmation. By using track-jet confirmation, it is possible to lower the minimum pT to approximately 25 GeV.
>
>
[Pt cut vs pile-up jet multiplicity]
 
Added:
>
>
The minimum LCW-scale pT cut versus pile-up jet multiplicity extrapolated to = 150. The data points are fit using an inverse power law. If an analysis requires fewer than 10\% of events to contain one or more pile-up jets, then a minimum pT of approximately 45 GeV would be necessary in the absence of track-jet confirmation. By using track-jet confirmation, it is possible to lower the minimum pT to approximately 25 GeV.
 
Changed:
<
<
eps file gif file
>
>
eps file gif file
 
Changed:
<
<
>
>
 
Deleted:
<
<
 
<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Deleted:
<
<
 
<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Deleted:
<
<

[Jet resolution vs pt]
 
Changed:
<
<
The jet energy resolution (sigmapT/pT) measured for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 within |eta|<0.8, versus the true jet pT, in the EM+JES calibration. The data points are fit with the function sigmapT/pT = sqrt{N2/pT^2 + S^2/pT + C^2, where N, S and C are the noise, stochastic and constant terms in the resolution. The resolution is measured for samples with different values of , the mean number of pile-up interactions per bunch crossing. The noise term increases with , while the fitted value for S is constant within errors and C is kept fixed to its value for = 0.
>
>
[Jet resolution vs pt]
 
Added:
>
>
The jet energy resolution (sigmapT/pT) measured for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 within |eta|<0.8, versus the true jet pT, in the EM+JES calibration. The data points are fit with the function sigmapT/pT = sqrt{N2/pT^2 + S^2/pT + C^2, where N, S and C are the noise, stochastic and constant terms in the resolution. The resolution is measured for samples with different values of , the mean number of pile-up interactions per bunch crossing. The noise term increases with , while the fitted value for S is constant within errors and C is kept fixed to its value for = 0.
 
Changed:
<
<
eps file gif file
>
>
eps file gif file
 
Changed:
<
<
>
>
 
Deleted:
<
<
 
<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Deleted:
<
<
 
<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Deleted:
<
<
 
Changed:
<
<
[Noise term vs mu]
>
>
[Noise term vs mu]
 
Changed:
<
<
Noise term (N) of the jet energy resolution versus the mean number of pile-up interactions per bunch crossing (). N is obtained from the fits to the jet energy resolution measured on anti-kt jets of R = 0.4 within |\eta|<0.8 in the EM+JES calibration. The value of N is reduced by applying the jet areas correction. A linear fit is used to extrapolate the value of N to <\mu> = 150, which is 14 GeV for the average offset and 8 GeV when the jet areas correction is applied.
>
>
Noise term (N) of the jet energy resolution versus the mean number of pile-up interactions per bunch crossing (). N is obtained from the fits to the jet energy resolution measured on anti-kt jets of R = 0.4 within |\eta|<0.8 in the EM+JES calibration. The value of N is reduced by applying the jet areas correction. A linear fit is used to extrapolate the value of N to <\mu> = 150, which is 14 GeV for the average offset and 8 GeV when the jet areas correction is applied.
 
Added:
>
>
eps file gif file
 
Changed:
<
<
eps file gif file
>
>
 
Deleted:
<
<
 
<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Deleted: <
<

 

<!-- ********************************************************* -->
<!-- Do NOT remove the remaining lines, but add requested info as appropriate-->
<!-- ********************************************************* -->


Line: 136 to 81 Added: >
>
 
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="EM4-NvsMu-Y0.eps" attr="" comment="" date="1342728590" name="EM4-NvsMu-Y0.eps" path="EM4-NvsMu-Y0.eps" size="12906" user="tcarli" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="EM4-NvsMu-Y0.png" attr="" comment="" date="1342728590" name="EM4-NvsMu-Y0.png" path="EM4-NvsMu-Y0.png" size="16825" user="tcarli" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="EM4-RinMuBins-eta0.eps" attr="" comment="" date="1342728589" name="EM4-RinMuBins-eta0.eps" path="EM4-RinMuBins-eta0.eps" size="19839" user="tcarli" version="1"

Revision 12012-07-19 - TancrediCarli

Line: 1 to 1
Added:
>
>
META TOPICPARENT name="JetEtMissPublicResults"
AtlasPublicTopicHeader.png

JetEtmissJetPerformanceforHighLuminosity

<!-- this line is optional -->

Introduction

<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->

[Mean number of pile-up jets vs mean number of interactions] The mean number of pile-up jets within |\eta| < 2.1 that pass various cuts on the reconstructed LCW-scale jet pT, versus the mean number of pile-up in teractions per bunch crossing (). A correction, dependent on the number of reconstructed primary vertices and , was applied to the jets in order to subtract the average pT offset induced by pile-up. A power law was used to extrapolate the pile-up jet multiplicity to = 150. Since these extrapolations are based on only two data points each, there is a very large uncertainty in the extrapolated pile-up jet multiplicity.

eps file gif file

<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->

<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->

[Mean number of pile-up jets vs mean number of interactions]

The mean number of pile-up jets within |\eta| < 2.1 that pass various cuts on the reconstructed LCW-scale jet pT, versus the mean number of pile-up interactions per bunch crossing (). In addition to applying the average offset correction, these jets were required to match hard-scatter track jets of pT > 5 GeV (track-jet confirmed), which rejects a large fraction of pile-up jets. A power law was used to extrapolate the pile-up jet multi plicity to = 150. Since these extrapolations are based on only two data points each, there is a very large uncertainty in the extrapolated pile-up jet multiplicity

eps file gif file

<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->

<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->

[Pt cut vs pile-up jet multiplicity]

The minimum LCW-scale pT cut versus pile-up jet multiplicity extrapolated to = 150. The data points are fit using an inverse power law. If an analysis requires fewer than 10\% of events to contain one or more pile-up jets, then a minimum pT of approximately 45 GeV would be necessary in the absence of track-jet confirmation. By using track-jet confirmation, it is possible to lower the minimum pT to approximately 25 GeV.

eps file gif file

<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->

<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->

[Jet resolution vs pt]

The jet energy resolution (sigmapT/pT) measured for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 within |eta|<0.8, versus the true jet pT, in the EM+JES calibration. The data points are fit with the function sigmapT/pT = sqrt{N2/pT^2 + S^2/pT + C^2, where N, S and C are the noise, stochastic and constant terms in the resolution. The resolution is measured for samples with different values of , the mean number of pile-up interactions per bunch crossing. The noise term increases with , while the fitted value for S is constant within errors and C is kept fixed to its value for = 0.

eps file gif file

<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->

<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->

[Noise term vs mu]

Noise term (N) of the jet energy resolution versus the mean number of pile-up interactions per bunch crossing (). N is obtained from the fits to the jet energy resolution measured on anti-kt jets of R = 0.4 within |\eta|<0.8 in the EM+JES calibration. The value of N is reduced by applying the jet areas correction. A linear fit is used to extrapolate the value of N to <\mu> = 150, which is 14 GeV for the average offset and 8 GeV when the jet areas correction is applied.

eps file gif file

<!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->

<!-- ********************************************************* -->
<!-- Do NOT remove the remaining lines, but add requested info as appropriate-->
<!-- ********************************************************* -->


<!-- For significant updates to the topic, consider adding your 'signature' (beneath this editing box) -->
Major updates:
-- TancrediCarli - 19-Jul-2012

<!-- Person responsible for the page: 
Either leave as is - the creator's name will be inserted; 
Or replace the complete REVINFO tag (including percentages symbols) with a name in the form TwikiUsersName -->
Responsible: TancrediCarli
Subject: public
<!-- Once this page has been reviewed, please add the name and the date e.g. StephenHaywood - 31 Oct 2006 -->

META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="EM4-NvsMu-Y0.eps" attr="" comment="" date="1342728590" name="EM4-NvsMu-Y0.eps" path="EM4-NvsMu-Y0.eps" size="12906" user="tcarli" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="EM4-NvsMu-Y0.png" attr="" comment="" date="1342728590" name="EM4-NvsMu-Y0.png" path="EM4-NvsMu-Y0.png" size="16825" user="tcarli" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="EM4-RinMuBins-eta0.eps" attr="" comment="" date="1342728589" name="EM4-RinMuBins-eta0.eps" path="EM4-RinMuBins-eta0.eps" size="19839" user="tcarli" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="EM4-RinMuBins-eta0.png" attr="" comment="" date="1342728589" name="EM4-RinMuBins-eta0.png" path="EM4-RinMuBins-eta0.png" size="22401" user="tcarli" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="meanTJCVsMu_ETA0.eps" attr="" comment="" date="1342728589" name="meanTJCVsMu_ETA0.eps" path="meanTJCVsMu_ETA0.eps" size="16856" user="tcarli" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="meanTJCVsMu_ETA0.png" attr="" comment="" date="1342728589" name="meanTJCVsMu_ETA0.png" path="meanTJCVsMu_ETA0.png" size="19873" user="tcarli" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="meanVsMu_ETA0.eps" attr="" comment="" date="1342728588" name="meanVsMu_ETA0.eps" path="meanVsMu_ETA0.eps" size="16447" user="tcarli" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="meanVsMu_ETA0.png" attr="" comment="" date="1342728588" name="meanVsMu_ETA0.png" path="meanVsMu_ETA0.png" size="19478" user="tcarli" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="ptMinVsMean_ETA0.eps" attr="" comment="" date="1342728588" name="ptMinVsMean_ETA0.eps" path="ptMinVsMean_ETA0.eps" size="12893" user="tcarli" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="ptMinVsMean_ETA0.png" attr="" comment="" date="1342728587" name="ptMinVsMean_ETA0.png" path="ptMinVsMean_ETA0.png" size="18730" user="tcarli" version="1"
 
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright & 2008-2019 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback