# Difference: TauPublicCollisionPlots (1 vs. 17)

#### Revision 172018-06-22 - LucaFiorini

Line: 1 to 1

 META TOPICPARENT name="TauPublicCollisionResults"
Line: 10 to 10


Set turl = https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/AtlasPublic/TauPublicCollisionResults

!-->
>
>

# Introduction

Public collision plots approved by the tau group which have not been superseded by notes/papers yet.

Superseded plots can be found here.

Changed:
<
<
All tau public results can be found here.
>
>
All tau public results can be found here.

## Performance plots

#### Revision 162017-11-29 - MichelJanus

Line: 1 to 1

 META TOPICPARENT name="TauPublicCollisionResults"
Line: 26 to 26

Changed:
<
<
Tau identification efficiency for the three working points (Loose, Medium and Tight) as a function of pT for reconstructed $\tau$ candidates, shown for one-prong (left) and three-prong (right) taus.
>
>
Tau identification efficiency for the three working points (Loose, Medium and Tight) using the algorithm optimized for HL-LHC detector and conditions (HL-LHC tuning”) as a function of pT for reconstructed $\tau$ candidates, shown for one-prong taus.

Line: 35 to 35

Changed:
<
<
>
>

>
>

 Tau identification efficiency for the three working points (Loose, Medium and Tight) using the algorithm optimized for HL-LHC detector and conditions (HL-LHC tuning”) as a function of pT for reconstructed $\tau$ candidates, shown for three-prong taus. Jet rejection as a function of $\tau$ efficiency for the algorithm optimized for HL-LHC detector and conditions (HL-LHC tuning”) for $\tau$ candidates within $|\eta|<4.0$ (black) as well as for tau candidates restricted to $|\eta|<2.5$ (blue), compared to the Run 2 performance optimized for the Run-2 detector and conditions (Run-2 performance”) for $\tau$ candidates within $|\eta|<2.5$ (green), shown for one-prong taus.

>
>

>
>
 Jet rejection as a function of $\tau$ efficiency for the algorithm optimized for HL-LHC detector and conditions (HL-LHC tuning”) for $\tau$ candidates within $|\eta|<4.0$ (black) as well as for tau candidates restricted to $|\eta|<2.5$ (blue), compared to the Run 2 performance optimized for the Run-2 detector and conditions (Run-2 performance”) for $\tau$ candidates within $|\eta|<2.5$ (green), shown for three-prong taus.

### Performance Plot for ICHEP 2016 (July 2016)

Line: 613 to 665

Changed:
<
<
 META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.eps" attr="" comment="" date="1511943929" name="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.eps" path="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.eps" size="16299" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.png" attr="" comment="" date="1511943930" name="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.png" path="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.png" size="63646" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.eps" attr="" comment="" date="1511943930" name="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.eps" path="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.eps" size="16299" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.png" attr="" comment="" date="1511943930" name="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.png" path="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.png" size="64113" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.eps" attr="" comment="" date="1511943931" name="c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.eps" path="c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.eps" size="15833" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.png" attr="" comment="" date="1511943931" name="c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.png" path="c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.png" size="73941" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.eps" attr="" comment="" date="1511943931" name="c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.eps" path="c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.eps" size="16222" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.png" attr="" comment="" date="1511943932" name="c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.png" path="c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.png" size="76121" user="janus" version="1"
>
>
 META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.eps" attr="h" comment="" date="1511944918" name="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.eps" path="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.eps" size="16299" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.png" attr="h" comment="" date="1511944938" name="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.png" path="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.png" size="63646" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.eps" attr="h" comment="" date="1511945217" name="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.eps" path="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.eps" size="16299" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.png" attr="h" comment="" date="1511945233" name="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.png" path="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.png" size="64113" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.eps" attr="h" comment="" date="1511945278" name="c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.eps" path="c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.eps" size="15833" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.png" attr="h" comment="" date="1511945295" name="c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.png" path="c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.png" size="73941" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.eps" attr="h" comment="" date="1511945310" name="c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.eps" path="c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.eps" size="16222" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.png" attr="h" comment="" date="1511945325" name="c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.png" path="c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.png" size="76121" user="janus" version="1"

#### Revision 152017-11-29 - MichelJanus

Line: 1 to 1

 META TOPICPARENT name="TauPublicCollisionResults"
Line: 19 to 19

## Performance plots

>
>

### Performance Plot for HL-LHC Workshop 2017 (October 2017)

 Tau identification efficiency for the three working points (Loose, Medium and Tight) as a function of pT for reconstructed $\tau$ candidates, shown for one-prong (left) and three-prong (right) taus.

### Performance Plot for ICHEP 2016 (July 2016)

Line: 589 to 612

<!-- Once this page has been reviewed, please add the name and the date e.g. StephenHaywood - 31 Oct 2006 -->

\ No newline at end of file

>
>
 META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.eps" attr="" comment="" date="1511943929" name="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.eps" path="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.eps" size="16299" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.png" attr="" comment="" date="1511943930" name="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.png" path="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.png" size="63646" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.eps" attr="" comment="" date="1511943930" name="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.eps" path="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.eps" size="16299" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.png" attr="" comment="" date="1511943930" name="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.png" path="c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.png" size="64113" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.eps" attr="" comment="" date="1511943931" name="c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.eps" path="c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.eps" size="15833" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.png" attr="" comment="" date="1511943931" name="c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.png" path="c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.png" size="73941" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.eps" attr="" comment="" date="1511943931" name="c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.eps" path="c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.eps" size="16222" user="janus" version="1" attachment="c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.png" attr="" comment="" date="1511943932" name="c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.png" path="c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.png" size="76121" user="janus" version="1"

#### Revision 142016-08-01 - PierOlivierDeViveiros

Line: 1 to 1

 META TOPICPARENT name="TauPublicCollisionResults"
Line: 19 to 19

## Performance plots

>
>

### Performance Plot for ICHEP 2016 (July 2016)

 The visible mass reconstructed using isolated muons and offline tau candidates passing the offline loose identification requirement. The Z mass peak is observed in an enriched sample of $Z\to\tau\tau\to\mu\tau$(had) events from the 2016 dataset in 13 TeV collisions, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 7.1fb-1. These events are collected using a single muon trigger. Event selections and background estimations are described in ATL-PHYS-PUB-2015-025 and in Eur. Phys. J. C75 (2015) 303. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

### Performance plots for LHCC 2015 (December 2015)

#### Revision 132015-12-08 - PierOlivierDeViveiros

Line: 1 to 1

 META TOPICPARENT name="TauPublicCollisionResults"
Line: 19 to 19

## Performance plots

>
>

### Performance plots for LHCC 2015 (December 2015)

 (Plot 1:) The BDT tau identification score for offline tau candidates passing the offline medium identification requirement. The tau candidates are observed in an enriched sample of $Z\to\tau\tau\to\mu\tau$(had) events from the 2015 dataset in 13 TeV collisions, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 3.3fb-1. These events are collected using a single muon trigger. Event selections and background estimations are described in ATL-PHYS-PUB-2015-025 and in Eur. Phys. J. C75 (2015) 303. Only statistical uncertainties are shown. (Plot 2:) The visible mass reconstructed using isolated muons and offline tau candidates passing the offline medium identification requirement. The Z mass peak is observed with high purity in an enriched sample of $Z\to\tau\tau\to\mu\tau$(had) events from the 2015 dataset in 13 TeV collisions, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 3.3fb-1. These events are collected using a single muon trigger. Event selections and background estimations are described in ATL-PHYS-PUB-2015-025 and in Eur. Phys. J. C75 (2015) 303. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

### Data vs. MC comparison plots (March 2014)

#### Revision 122014-03-13 - AttilioAndreazza

Line: 1 to 1

 META TOPICPARENT name="TauPublicCollisionResults"
Line: 23 to 23

>
>

### Performance plots for tau identification, tau e veto and tau energy scale (Moriond2013 ID and data set) (February 2013)

#### Revision 112014-03-13 - AttilioAndreazza

Line: 1 to 1

 META TOPICPARENT name="TauPublicCollisionResults"
Line: 19 to 19

## Performance plots

>
>

### Performance plots for tau identification, tau e veto and tau energy scale (Moriond2013 ID and data set) (February 2013)

#### Revision 102013-05-01 - StefaniaXella

Line: 1 to 1

 META TOPICPARENT name="TauPublicCollisionResults"
Line: 24 to 24

Changed:
<
<

>
>
(Plot 1:) Inverse background efficiency as a function of the signal efficiency with a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm for 1-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates with a $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The signal efficiencies are obtained using $Z\to\tau \tau$, $Z'\to\tau \tau$ and $W\to\tau \nu$ simulated events. The background efficiencies are derived using 2012 collision data after applying a multi-jet selection and are calculated with respect to all candidates with exactly one reconstructed track. The Winter 2013 BDT uses $\pi^{0}$-related variables that increase its performance.
Line: 41 to 40

Deleted:
<
<

(Plot 3:) Signal efficiencies of the Winter 2013 TauBDT for 1-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The identification is performed using a BDT algorithm at a loose, medium or tight working point. The efficiencies are obtained using $Z\to\tau\tau$, $Z'\to\tau\tau$ and $W\to\tau\nu$ simulated events with one reconstructed track with respect to all true taus decaying into one charged particle.
Line: 50 to 47

Deleted:
<
<

(Plot 4:) Signal efficiencies of the Winter 2013 TauBDT for multi-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The identification is performed using a BDT algorithm at a loose, medium or tight working point. The efficiencies are obtained using $Z \to \tau\tau$, $Z' \to \tau\tau$ and $W \to \tau\nu$ simulated events with two or three reconstructed tracks with respect to all true taus decaying into three charged particles.
Line: 110 to 105

Deleted:
<
<

(Plot 9:) Distribution of the number of tracks associated with hadronically-decaying tau candidates from
Line: 127 to 120

Deleted:
<
<

(Plot 10:) Distribution of the number of tracks associated with hadronically-decaying tau candidates from
Line: 144 to 135

Deleted:
<
<

(Plot 11:) Response curves as a function of the reconstructed visible tau momentum at LC scale for one-prong tau decays in bins of |η|. The momentum range display corresponds to transverse momenta greater than 15 GeV. The tau response is defined as the ratio of the reconstructed visible momentum at LC scale divided by the true visible momentum and binned in the true visible momentum and |η|. Uncertainties are statistical only. The method is equivalent to that described in ATLAS-CONF-2012-064 for 2011 data.
Line: 155 to 144

Deleted:
<
<

(Plot 12:) Response curves as a function of the reconstructed visible tau momentum at LC scale for multi-prong tau decays in bins of |η|. The momentum range display corresponds to transverse momenta greater than 15 GeV. The multi-prong tau decays refer to the hadronic decay modes with at least two reconstructed tracks. The tau response is defined as the ratio of the reconstructed visible momentum at LC scale divided by the true visible momentum and binned in the true visible momentum and |η|. Uncertainties are statistical only. The method is equivalent to that described in ATLAS-CONF-2012-064 for 2011 data.
Line: 166 to 153

Deleted:
<
<

(Plot 13:) Systematic uncertainty on the tau energy scale (TES) for 1-prong tau decays in the central region (|η| < 0.3), as a function of PT. Each different marker represents a separate source of uncertainty as indicated in the legend. The violet band shows the combined uncertainty from all sources. The method is similar to that described in ATLAS-CONF-2012-064 for 2011 data.
Line: 177 to 162

Deleted:
<
<

(Plot 14:) Systematic uncertainty on the tau energy scale (TES) for multi-prong tau decays in the forward region ( 1.6< |η| < 2.5), as a function of PT. The multi-prong tau decays refer to the hadronic decay modes with at least two reconstructed tracks. Each different marker represents a separate source of uncertainty as indicated in the legend. The violet band shows the combined uncertainty from all sources. The method is similar to that described in ATLAS-CONF-2012-064 for 2011 data.
Line: 186 to 169

Deleted:
<
<

(Plot 15:) Momentum resolution for 1-prong tau decays and multi-prong tau decays as function of PT . The multi-prong tau decays refer to the hadronic decay modes with at least two reconstructed tracks. The resolution is calculated as the difference between the reconstructed and generated PT . The resolution is obtained from a Gaussian fit by dividing the σ of the Gaussian by the mean value of generated P. The method is similar to that described in ATLAS-CONF-2012-064 for 2011 data.
Line: 199 to 178

Deleted:
<
<

(Plot 16:) Background efficiency as a function of signal efficiency with a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm for truth-matched 1-prong tau candidates with pT > 15 GeV and eta < 2.47. The signal efficiency is obtained using Z to tau tau simulated events. The background efficiency is obtained using Z to ee simulated events. Candidates are required to pass loose tau identification and not overlap within a cone R=0.2 with a reconstructed electron candidate which passes tight electron identification.
Line: 213 to 187

Deleted:
<
<

(Plot 17:) Signal efficiency of the Winter 2013 electron veto for truth-matched 1-prong tau candidates as a function of reconstructed transverse momentum for pT > 15 GeV and eta < 2.47. The identification is performed using a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm at a loose, medium, or tight working point. The signal efficiency is obtained using Z to tau tau simulated events. Candidates are required to pass loose tau identification and not overlap within a cone R=0.2 with a reconstructed electron candidate which passes tight electron identification.
Line: 225 to 196

Deleted:
<
<

(Plot 18:) Signal efficiency of the Winter 2013 electron veto for truth-matched 1-prong tau candidates as a function of reconstructed transverse momentum for pT > 15 GeV and eta < 2.47. The identification is performed using a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm at a loose, medium, or tight working point. The signal efficiency is obtained using Z to tau tau simulated events. Candidates are required to pass loose tau identification and not overlap within a cone R=0.2 with a reconstructed electron candidate which passes tight electron identification.
Line: 236 to 204

Deleted:
<
<

(Plot 19:) Signal efficiency of the Winter 2013 electron veto for truth-matched 1-prong tau candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for pT > 15 GeV and eta < 2.47. The identification is performed using a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm at a loose, medium, or tight working point. The signal efficiency is obtained using Z to tau tau simulated events. Candidates are required to pass loose tau identification and not overlap within a cone R=0.2 with a reconstructed electron candidate which passes tight electron identification.
Line: 249 to 212

Changed:
<
<

>
>
(Plot 20:) Background efficiency of the Winter 2013 electron veto for 1-prong tau candidates as a function of transverse momentum for pT > 15 GeV and eta < 2.47. The identification is performed using a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm at a loose, medium, or tight working point. The background efficiency is obtained using Z to ee simulated events. Candidates are required to pass loose tau identification and not overlap within a cone R=0.2 with a reconstructed electron candidate which passes tight electron identification.
Line: 264 to 222

Changed:
<
<

>
>
(Plot 21:) Background efficiency of the Winter 2013 electron veto for 1-prong tau candidates as a function of transverse momentum for pT > 15 GeV and eta < 2.47. The identification is performed using a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm at a loose, medium, or tight working point. The background efficiency is obtained using Z to ee simulated events. Candidates are required to pass loose tau identification and not overlap within a cone R=0.2 with a reconstructed electron candidate which passes tight electron identification.

Deleted:
<
<

(Plot 22:) Background efficiency of the Winter 2013 electron veto for 1-prong tau candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for pT > 15 GeV and eta < 2.47. The identification is performed using a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm at a loose, medium, or tight working point. The background efficiency is obtained using Z to ee simulated events. Candidates are required to pass loose tau identification and not overlap within a cone R=0.2 with a reconstructed electron candidate which passes tight electron identification.

#### Revision 92013-03-06 - StefaniaXella

Line: 1 to 1

 META TOPICPARENT name="TauPublicCollisionResults"
Line: 201 to 201

>
>

(Plot 16:) Background efficiency as a function of signal efficiency with a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm for truth-matched 1-prong tau candidates with pT > 15 GeV and eta < 2.47. The signal efficiency is obtained using Z to tau tau simulated events. The background efficiency is obtained using Z to ee simulated events. Candidates are required to pass loose tau identification and not overlap within a cone R=0.2 with a reconstructed electron candidate which passes tight electron identification.

(Plot 17:) Signal efficiency of the Winter 2013 electron veto for truth-matched 1-prong tau candidates as a function of reconstructed transverse momentum for pT > 15 GeV and eta < 2.47. The identification is performed using a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm at a loose, medium, or tight working point. The signal efficiency is obtained using Z to tau tau simulated events. Candidates are required to pass loose tau identification and not overlap within a cone R=0.2 with a reconstructed electron candidate which passes tight electron identification.

(Plot 18:) Signal efficiency of the Winter 2013 electron veto for truth-matched 1-prong tau candidates as a function of reconstructed transverse momentum for pT > 15 GeV and eta < 2.47. The identification is performed using a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm at a loose, medium, or tight working point. The signal efficiency is obtained using Z to tau tau simulated events. Candidates are required to pass loose tau identification and not overlap within a cone R=0.2 with a reconstructed electron candidate which passes tight electron identification.

(Plot 19:) Signal efficiency of the Winter 2013 electron veto for truth-matched 1-prong tau candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for pT > 15 GeV and eta < 2.47. The identification is performed using a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm at a loose, medium, or tight working point. The signal efficiency is obtained using Z to tau tau simulated events. Candidates are required to pass loose tau identification and not overlap within a cone R=0.2 with a reconstructed electron candidate which passes tight electron identification.

(Plot 20:) Background efficiency of the Winter 2013 electron veto for 1-prong tau candidates as a function of transverse momentum for pT > 15 GeV and eta < 2.47. The identification is performed using a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm at a loose, medium, or tight working point. The background efficiency is obtained using Z to ee simulated events. Candidates are required to pass loose tau identification and not overlap within a cone R=0.2 with a reconstructed electron candidate which passes tight electron identification.

(Plot 21:) Background efficiency of the Winter 2013 electron veto for 1-prong tau candidates as a function of transverse momentum for pT > 15 GeV and eta < 2.47. The identification is performed using a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm at a loose, medium, or tight working point. The background efficiency is obtained using Z to ee simulated events. Candidates are required to pass loose tau identification and not overlap within a cone R=0.2 with a reconstructed electron candidate which passes tight electron identification.

(Plot 22:) Background efficiency of the Winter 2013 electron veto for 1-prong tau candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for pT > 15 GeV and eta < 2.47. The identification is performed using a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm at a loose, medium, or tight working point. The background efficiency is obtained using Z to ee simulated events. Candidates are required to pass loose tau identification and not overlap within a cone R=0.2 with a reconstructed electron candidate which passes tight electron identification.

Line: 219 to 310

>
>

<!--


#### Revision 82013-03-04 - PatrickJussel

Line: 1 to 1

 META TOPICPARENT name="TauPublicCollisionResults"
Line: 480 to 480

<!-- Once this page has been reviewed, please add the name and the date e.g. StephenHaywood - 31 Oct 2006 -->
Deleted:
<
<

#### Revision 72013-03-04 - StefaniaXella

Line: 1 to 1

 META TOPICPARENT name="TauPublicCollisionResults"
Line: 147 to 147

>
>
(Plot 11:) Response curves as a function of the reconstructed visible tau momentum at LC scale for one-prong tau decays in bins of |η|. The momentum range display corresponds to transverse momenta greater than 15 GeV. The tau response is defined as the ratio of the reconstructed visible momentum at LC scale divided by the true visible momentum and binned in the true visible momentum and |η|. Uncertainties are statistical only. The method is equivalent to that described in ATLAS-CONF-2012-064 for 2011 data.

(Plot 12:) Response curves as a function of the reconstructed visible tau momentum at LC scale for multi-prong tau decays in bins of |η|. The momentum range display corresponds to transverse momenta greater than 15 GeV. The multi-prong tau decays refer to the hadronic decay modes with at least two reconstructed tracks. The tau response is defined as the ratio of the reconstructed visible momentum at LC scale divided by the true visible momentum and binned in the true visible momentum and |η|. Uncertainties are statistical only. The method is equivalent to that described in ATLAS-CONF-2012-064 for 2011 data.

(Plot 13:) Systematic uncertainty on the tau energy scale (TES) for 1-prong tau decays in the central region (|η| < 0.3), as a function of PT. Each different marker represents a separate source of uncertainty as indicated in the legend. The violet band shows the combined uncertainty from all sources. The method is similar to that described in ATLAS-CONF-2012-064 for 2011 data.

(Plot 14:) Systematic uncertainty on the tau energy scale (TES) for multi-prong tau decays in the forward region ( 1.6< |η| < 2.5), as a function of PT. The multi-prong tau decays refer to the hadronic decay modes with at least two reconstructed tracks. Each different marker represents a separate source of uncertainty as indicated in the legend. The violet band shows the combined uncertainty from all sources. The method is similar to that described in ATLAS-CONF-2012-064 for 2011 data.

(Plot 15:) Momentum resolution for 1-prong tau decays and multi-prong tau decays as function of PT . The multi-prong tau decays refer to the hadronic decay modes with at least two reconstructed tracks. The resolution is calculated as the difference between the reconstructed and generated PT . The resolution is obtained from a Gaussian fit by dividing the σ of the Gaussian by the mean value of generated P. The method is similar to that described in ATLAS-CONF-2012-064 for 2011 data.

Line: 160 to 214

>
>

<!--


#### Revision 62013-03-01 - StefaniaXella

Line: 1 to 1

 META TOPICPARENT name="TauPublicCollisionResults"
Line: 19 to 19

## Performance plots

Changed:
<
<

>
>

### Performance plots for tau identification, tau e veto and tau energy scale (Moriond2013 ID and data set) (February 2013)

Line: 80 to 80

>
>
(Plot 7:) Distribution of the number of tracks associated with hadronically-decaying tau candidates from the Z to tau tau tag & probe selection in 2012 data, before any tau identification requirement is applied. The signal contribution from simulated Z events is outlined in red. The jet background is taken from data control regions, while the electron background is taken from simulated samples. A fit to the distribution of the number of tracks provides the number of hadronically-decaying tau leptons before any identification criteria are applied, for the purpose of the identification efficiency measurement [using the same method as described in ATLAS-CONF-2012-142].

(Plot 8:) Distribution of the number of tracks associated with hadronically-decaying tau candidates from the Z to tau tau tag & probe selection in 2012 data, after the medium tau identification requirement is applied. The signal contribution from simulated Z events is outlined in red. The jet background is taken from data control regions, while the electron background is taken from simulated samples. The 1-prong (multi- prong) template is based on tau candidates with exactly one (two or more) reconstructed tracks in a cone of deltaR<0.2 around the tau axis. A fit to the distribution of the number of tracks provides the number of hadronically-decaying tau leptons after the identification criteria are applied, for the purpose of the identification efficiency measurement [using the same method as described in ATLAS-CONF-2012-142].

(Plot 9:) Distribution of the number of tracks associated with hadronically-decaying tau candidates from the W to tau nu tag & probe selection in 2012 data, before any tau identification requirement is applied. The signal contribution from simulated W events is outlined in red. The jet background is taken from data control regions, while the electron background is taken from simulated samples. A fit to the distribution of the number of tracks provides the number of hadronically-decaying tau leptons before any identification criteria are applied, for the purpose of the identification efficiency measurement [using the same method as described in ATLAS-CONF-2012-142].

(Plot 10:) Distribution of the number of tracks associated with hadronically-decaying tau candidates from the W to tau nu tag & probe selection in 2012 data, after the medium tau identification requirement is applied. The signal contribution from simulated W events is outlined in red. The jet background is taken from data control regions, while the electron background is taken from simulated samples. A fit to the distribution of the number of tracks provides the number of hadronically-decaying tau leptons after the identification criteria are applied, for the purpose of the identification efficiency measurement [using the same method as described in ATLAS-CONF-2012-142].

Line: 89 to 156

>
>

<!--

-->
Line: 349 to 421

<!-- Once this page has been reviewed, please add the name and the date e.g. StephenHaywood - 31 Oct 2006 -->
>
>

#### Revision 52013-02-25 - MartinFlechl

Line: 1 to 1

 META TOPICPARENT name="TauPublicCollisionResults"
Line: 23 to 23

>
>

(Plot 1:) Inverse background efficiency as a function of the signal efficiency with a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm for 1-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates with a $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The signal efficiencies are obtained using $Z\to\tau \tau$, $Z'\to\tau \tau$ and $W\to\tau \nu$ simulated events. The background efficiencies are derived using 2012 collision data after applying a multi-jet selection and are calculated with respect to all candidates with exactly one reconstructed track. The Winter 2013 BDT uses $\pi^{0}$-related variables that increase its performance.
Line: 106 to 109

>
>

(Plot 2:) Final systematic uncertainty on the tau energy scale (TES) for multi-prong decays in the endcap region, as a function of PT. Each different marker represents a separate source of uncertainty as indicated in the legend. The violet band shows the combined uncertainty from all sources. The method is equivalent to that described in ATLAS-CONF-2012-064 for 2011 data.
Line: 113 to 122

>
>

(Plot 3:) Transverse momentum resolution for one prong decays in different eta regions as function of PT . The transverse resolution is calculated as the difference between the reconstructed and generated PT . The resolution is obtained from a Gaussian fit by dividing the σ of the Gaussian by the mean value of generated PT.
Line: 121 to 136

>
>

(Plot 4:) Signal eﬃciencies for 1-prong τ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for loose (green), medium (blue) and tight (red) selection on all jets discriminants with a pT>20 GeV and |η| <2.3. The identiﬁcation was performed using a projective Log-LikeliHood score. The eﬃciencies were obtained using Z->ττ, Z'->ττ and W->τν Pythia8 samples.
Line: 128 to 149

>
>

(Plot 5:) Background eﬃciencies for 1-prong τ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for loose (green), medium (blue) and tight (red) selection on all jets discriminants with a pT>20 GeV and |η| <2.3. The identiﬁcation was performed using a projective Log-LikeliHood score. The eﬃciencies were obtained using 2012 dijet data samples with an integrated luminosity of 740 pb-1.
Line: 135 to 162

>
>

(Plot 6:) Signal eﬃciencies for multi-prong τ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for loose (green), medium (blue) and tight (red) selection on all jets discriminants with a pT>20 GeV and |η| <2.3. The identiﬁcation was performed using a projective Log-LikeliHood score. The eﬃciencies were obtained using Z->ττ, Z'->ττ and W->τν Pythia8 samples.
Line: 142 to 175

>
>

(Plot 7:) Background eﬃciencies for multi-prong τ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for loose (green), medium (blue) and tight (red) selection on all jets discriminants with a pT>20 GeV and |η| <2.3. The identiﬁcation was performed using a projective Log-LikeliHood score. The eﬃciencies were obtained using 2012 dijet data samples with an integrated luminosity of 740 pb-1.
Line: 149 to 188

>
>

(Plot 8:) Signal eﬃciencies for multi-prong τ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for loose (green), medium (blue) and tight (red) selection on all jets discriminants with a pT>20 GeV and |η| <2.3. The identiﬁcation was performed using a Boosted Decision Tree algorithm. The eﬃciencies were obtained using Z->ττ, Z'->ττ and W->τν Pythia8 samples.
Line: 156 to 201

>
>

(Plot 9:) Background eﬃciencies for multi-prong τ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for loose (green), medium (blue) and tight (red) selection on all jets discriminants with a pT>20 GeV and |η| <2.3. The identiﬁcation was performed using a Boosted Decision Tree algorithm. The eﬃciencies were obtained using 2012 dijet data samples with an integrated luminosity of 740 pb-1.

Deleted:
<
<

Line: 193 to 243

>
>

(Plot 2:) Background eﬃciencies for 1-prong τ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for loose (green), medium (blue) and tight (red) selection for pT>20 GeV and |η| <2.3. The identiﬁcation was performed using a Boosted Decision Tree algorithm. The eﬃciencies were obtained using 2012 dijet data samples with an integrated luminosity of 740 pb-1.
Line: 200 to 253

>
>

(Plot 3:) Inverse background eﬃciency as a function of the signal eﬃciency for 1-prong τ candidates with a pT > 20 GeV and |η| < 2.3. The signal eﬃciencies were obtained using Z->ττ,Z'->ττ and W->τν Pythia 8 samples, while the background efficiencies were derived using 2012 dijet data samples.
Line: 207 to 263

>
>

(Plot 4:) Inverse background eﬃciency as a function of the signal eﬃciency for multi-prong τ candidates with a pT > 20 GeV and |η| < 2.3. Multi-prong τ candidates are deﬁned as reconstructed τ candidates with 2 or 3 tracks and for the signal efficiency only true τ leptons decaying into three charged particles are considered. The signal eﬃciencies were obtained using Z->ττ,Z'->ττ and W->τν Pythia 8 samples, while the background efficiencies were derived using 2012 dijet data samples.
>
>

Line: 249 to 310

>
>

A candidate for a W->τν decay, with a hadronically decaying tau, collected on 24 May 2010.
Event properties:
pT(τ) = 29 GeV
Line: 256 to 320
Δφ(τ, ETmiss ) = 3.1
mT = 68 GeV

No additional object (electron, muon or jet) was found in the event.
>
>

Changed:
<
<
>
>

#### Revision 42013-02-25 - MartinFlechl

Line: 1 to 1

 META TOPICPARENT name="TauPublicCollisionResults"
Line: 19 to 19

## Performance plots

Deleted:
<
<
<!--
\begin{figure}[hb]
\centering
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{../retry/roc_1p.png}
\caption{Inverse background efficiency as a function of the signal efficiency with a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm for 1-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates
with a $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The signal efficiencies are obtained using $Z\to\tau \tau$, $Z'\to\tau \tau$ and $W\to\tau \nu$ simulated events. The background efficiencies are derived using 2012 collision data after applying a multi-jet selection and are calculated with respect to all candidates with exactly one reconstructed track. The Winter 2013 BDT uses $\pi^{0}$-related variables that increase its performance.}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

\newpage

\begin{figure}[hb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,scale=0.3]{../retry/roc_mp.png}
\caption{Inverse background efficiency as a function of the signal efficiency with a BDT algorithm for multi-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates
with a $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. Multi-prong $\tau$ candidates are defined as reconstructed $\tau$ candidates with 2 or 3 tracks and for the signal efficiency only true $\tau$ leptons decaying into three charged particles are considered. The signal efficiencies are obtained using $Z\to\tau\tau$, $Z'\to\tau\tau$ and $W\to\tau\nu$ simulated events. The background efficiencies are derived using 2012 collision data after applying a multi-jet selection and are calculated with respect to all candidates with two or three reconstructed tracks.}
\end{figure}

\newpage

\begin{figure}[hb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,scale=0.3]{../lastpics/bkgEff_1p_Tue.png}
\caption{Background efficiencies of the Winter 2013 TauBDT for 1-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The identification is performed  using a BDT algorithm at a loose, medium or tight working point. The efficiencies are derived using 2012 collision data after applying a multi-jet selection and are calculated with respect to all candidates with exactly one reconstructed track.}
\end{figure}

\newpage

\begin{figure}[hb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,scale=0.3]{../lastpics/bkgEff_mp_Tue.png}
\caption{Background efficiencies of the Winter 2013 TauBDT for multi-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The identification is performed  using a BDT algorithm at a loose, medium or tight working point. The efficiencies are derived using 2012 collision data after applying a multi-jet selection and are calculated with respect to all candidates with two or three reconstructed tracks.}
\end{figure}

\newpage

\begin{figure}[hb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,scale=0.3]{../lastpics/sigEff_1p_Tue.png}
\caption{Signal efficiencies of the Winter 2013 TauBDT for 1-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The identification is performed  using a BDT algorithm at a loose, medium or tight working point. The efficiencies are obtained using $Z\to\tau\tau$, $Z'\to\tau\tau$ and $W\to\tau\nu$ simulated events with one reconstructed track with respect to all true taus decaying into one charged particle.}
\end{figure}

\newpage

\begin{figure}[hb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,scale=0.3]{../lastpics/sigEff_mp_Tue.png}
\caption{Signal efficiencies of the Winter 2013 TauBDT for multi-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The identification is performed  using a BDT algorithm at a loose, medium or tight working point. The efficiencies are obtained using $Z \to \tau\tau$, $Z' \to \tau\tau$ and $W \to \tau\nu$ simulated events with two or three reconstructed tracks with respect to all true taus decaying into three charged particles.}
\end{figure}

-->

### Performance plots for tau identification, tau e veto and tau energy scale (Moriond2013 ID and data set) (February 2012)

 (Plot 1:)
Changed:
<
<
XXX
>
>
Inverse background efficiency as a function of the signal efficiency with a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm for 1-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates with a $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The signal efficiencies are obtained using $Z\to\tau \tau$, $Z'\to\tau \tau$ and $W\to\tau \nu$ simulated events. The background efficiencies are derived using 2012 collision data after applying a multi-jet selection and are calculated with respect to all candidates with exactly one reconstructed track. The Winter 2013 BDT uses $\pi^{0}$-related variables that increase its performance.

Line: 85 to 33

(Plot 2:)

Changed:
<
<
XXX
>
>
Inverse background efficiency as a function of the signal efficiency with a BDT algorithm for multi-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates with a $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. Multi-prong $\tau$ candidates are defined as reconstructed $\tau$ candidates with 2 or 3 tracks and for the signal efficiency only true $\tau$ leptons decaying into three charged particles are considered. The signal efficiencies are obtained using $Z\to\tau\tau$, $Z'\to\tau\tau$ and $W\to\tau\nu$ simulated events. The background efficiencies are derived using 2012 collision data after applying a multi-jet selection and are calculated with respect to all candidates with two or three reconstructed tracks.

Line: 93 to 42

(Plot 3:)

Changed:
<
<
XXX
>
>
Signal efficiencies of the Winter 2013 TauBDT for 1-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The identification is performed using a BDT algorithm at a loose, medium or tight working point. The efficiencies are obtained using $Z\to\tau\tau$, $Z'\to\tau\tau$ and $W\to\tau\nu$ simulated events with one reconstructed track with respect to all true taus decaying into one charged particle.

Line: 101 to 51

(Plot 4:)

Changed:
<
<
XXX
>
>
Signal efficiencies of the Winter 2013 TauBDT for multi-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The identification is performed using a BDT algorithm at a loose, medium or tight working point. The efficiencies are obtained using $Z \to \tau\tau$, $Z' \to \tau\tau$ and $W \to \tau\nu$ simulated events with two or three reconstructed tracks with respect to all true taus decaying into three charged particles.

Line: 109 to 60

(Plot 5:)

Changed:
<
<
XXX
>
>
Background efficiencies of the Winter 2013 TauBDT for 1-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The identification is performed using a BDT algorithm at a loose, medium or tight working point. The efficiencies are derived using 2012 collision data after applying a multi-jet selection and are calculated with respect to all candidates with exactly one reconstructed track.

Line: 117 to 69

(Plot 6:)

Changed:
<
<
XXX
>
>
Background efficiencies of the Winter 2013 TauBDT for multi-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The identification is performed using a BDT algorithm at a loose, medium or tight working point. The efficiencies are derived using 2012 collision data after applying a multi-jet selection and are calculated with respect to all candidates with two or three reconstructed tracks.

Line: 132 to 85

Changed:
<
<
>
>

<!--

-->

#### Revision 32013-02-22 - MartinFlechl

Line: 1 to 1

 META TOPICPARENT name="TauPublicCollisionResults"
Line: 12 to 12

# Introduction

Public collision plots approved by the tau group which have not been superseded by notes/papers yet.
>
>
Superseded plots can be found here.
>
>
All tau public results can be found here.

## Performance plots

Changed:
<
<

### Performance Plots for Tau Identification and Tau Energy Scale in 2012 (14 August 2012)

>
>
<!--
\begin{figure}[hb]
\centering
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{../retry/roc_1p.png}
\caption{Inverse background efficiency as a function of the signal efficiency with a Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) algorithm for 1-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates
with a $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The signal efficiencies are obtained using $Z\to\tau \tau$, $Z'\to\tau \tau$ and $W\to\tau \nu$ simulated events. The background efficiencies are derived using 2012 collision data after applying a multi-jet selection and are calculated with respect to all candidates with exactly one reconstructed track. The Winter 2013 BDT uses $\pi^{0}$-related variables that increase its performance.}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

\newpage

\begin{figure}[hb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,scale=0.3]{../retry/roc_mp.png}
\caption{Inverse background efficiency as a function of the signal efficiency with a BDT algorithm for multi-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates
with a $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. Multi-prong $\tau$ candidates are defined as reconstructed $\tau$ candidates with 2 or 3 tracks and for the signal efficiency only true $\tau$ leptons decaying into three charged particles are considered. The signal efficiencies are obtained using $Z\to\tau\tau$, $Z'\to\tau\tau$ and $W\to\tau\nu$ simulated events. The background efficiencies are derived using 2012 collision data after applying a multi-jet selection and are calculated with respect to all candidates with two or three reconstructed tracks.}
\end{figure}

\newpage

\begin{figure}[hb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,scale=0.3]{../lastpics/bkgEff_1p_Tue.png}
\caption{Background efficiencies of the Winter 2013 TauBDT for 1-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The identification is performed  using a BDT algorithm at a loose, medium or tight working point. The efficiencies are derived using 2012 collision data after applying a multi-jet selection and are calculated with respect to all candidates with exactly one reconstructed track.}
\end{figure}

\newpage

\begin{figure}[hb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,scale=0.3]{../lastpics/bkgEff_mp_Tue.png}
\caption{Background efficiencies of the Winter 2013 TauBDT for multi-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The identification is performed  using a BDT algorithm at a loose, medium or tight working point. The efficiencies are derived using 2012 collision data after applying a multi-jet selection and are calculated with respect to all candidates with two or three reconstructed tracks.}
\end{figure}

\newpage

\begin{figure}[hb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,scale=0.3]{../lastpics/sigEff_1p_Tue.png}
\caption{Signal efficiencies of the Winter 2013 TauBDT for 1-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The identification is performed  using a BDT algorithm at a loose, medium or tight working point. The efficiencies are obtained using $Z\to\tau\tau$, $Z'\to\tau\tau$ and $W\to\tau\nu$ simulated events with one reconstructed track with respect to all true taus decaying into one charged particle.}
\end{figure}

\newpage

\begin{figure}[hb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,scale=0.3]{../lastpics/sigEff_mp_Tue.png}
\caption{Signal efficiencies of the Winter 2013 TauBDT for multi-prong $\tau_\mathrm{had-vis}$ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for $p_\mathrm{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$. The identification is performed  using a BDT algorithm at a loose, medium or tight working point. The efficiencies are obtained using $Z \to \tau\tau$, $Z' \to \tau\tau$ and $W \to \tau\nu$ simulated events with two or three reconstructed tracks with respect to all true taus decaying into three charged particles.}
\end{figure}

-->

### Performance plots for tau identification, tau e veto and tau energy scale (Moriond2013 ID and data set) (February 2012)

 (Plot 1:) XXX (Plot 2:) XXX (Plot 3:) XXX (Plot 4:) XXX (Plot 5:) XXX (Plot 6:) XXX 

### Performance plots for Tau Identification and Tau Energy Scale in 2012 (14 August 2012)

Line: 85 to 211

Changed:
<
<
>
>

Line: 131 to 257
(Plot 4:) Inverse background eﬃciency as a function of the signal eﬃciency for multi-prong τ candidates with a pT > 20 GeV and |η| < 2.3. Multi-prong τ candidates are deﬁned as reconstructed τ candidates with 2 or 3 tracks and for the signal efficiency only true τ leptons decaying into three charged particles are considered. The signal eﬃciencies were obtained using Z->ττ,Z'->ττ and W->τν Pythia 8 samples, while the background efficiencies were derived using 2012 dijet data samples.
Changed:
<
<
>
>

Line: 140 to 266

>
>

## Event displays

### Z->ττ candidate event display (07 October 2010)

 This is a display of an event with a candidate Z->τ+τ-->μ+νντ-hν decay in the ATLAS detector where τh denotes a hadronic tau decay.Event properties: pT(μ) = 18 GeV pTvis(τh) = 26 GeV mvis(μ , τh) = 47 GeV mT(μ , ETmiss) = 8 GeV ETmiss = 7 GeV The hadronic tau candidate has three well identified tracks. The muon and tau candidate have opposite sign reconstructed charges. No additional object (electron, muon or jet) was reconstructed in this event.

### W->τν candidate event display (20 July 2010)

 A candidate for a W->τν decay, with a hadronically decaying tau, collected on 24 May 2010. Event properties: pT(τ) = 29 GeV ETmiss = 39 GeV Δφ(τ, ETmiss ) = 3.1 mT = 68 GeV No additional object (electron, muon or jet) was found in the event.

#### Revision 22013-02-22 - MartinFlechl

Line: 1 to 1

 META TOPICPARENT name="TauPublicCollisionResults"
Line: 6 to 6

<!-- this line is optional -->
>
>
<!--
Set turl = https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/AtlasPublic/TauPublicCollisionResults

!-->

# Introduction

Public collision plots approved by the tau group which have not been superseded by notes/papers yet.
>
>
Superseded plots can be found here.

### Performance Plots for Tau Identification and Tau Energy Scale in 2012 (14 August 2012)

Line: 80 to 86

Changed:
<
<
>
>

Line: 126 to 132
Inverse background eﬃciency as a function of the signal eﬃciency for multi-prong τ candidates with a pT > 20 GeV and |η| < 2.3. Multi-prong τ candidates are deﬁned as reconstructed τ candidates with 2 or 3 tracks and for the signal efficiency only true τ leptons decaying into three charged particles are considered. The signal eﬃciencies were obtained using Z->ττ,Z'->ττ and W->τν Pythia 8 samples, while the background efficiencies were derived using 2012 dijet data samples.
Changed:
<
<
>
>

#### Revision 12013-02-21 - MartinFlechl

Line: 1 to 1
>
>
 META TOPICPARENT name="TauPublicCollisionResults"

# TauPublicCollisionPlots

<!-- this line is optional -->

# Introduction

Public collision plots approved by the tau group which have not been superseded by notes/papers yet.

### Performance Plots for Tau Identification and Tau Energy Scale in 2012 (14 August 2012)

 (Plot 1:) Final systematic uncertainty on the tau energy scale (TES) for 1-prong decays in the central region (abs(eta)< 0.3), as a function of PT. Each different marker represents a separate source of uncertainty as indicated in the legend. The violet band shows the combined uncertainty from all sources. The method is equivalent to that described in ATLAS-CONF-2012-064 for 2011 data. (Plot 2:) Final systematic uncertainty on the tau energy scale (TES) for multi-prong decays in the endcap region, as a function of PT. Each different marker represents a separate source of uncertainty as indicated in the legend. The violet band shows the combined uncertainty from all sources. The method is equivalent to that described in ATLAS-CONF-2012-064 for 2011 data. (Plot 3:) Transverse momentum resolution for one prong decays in different eta regions as function of PT . The transverse resolution is calculated as the difference between the reconstructed and generated PT . The resolution is obtained from a Gaussian fit by dividing the σ of the Gaussian by the mean value of generated PT. (Plot 4:) Signal eﬃciencies for 1-prong τ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for loose (green), medium (blue) and tight (red) selection on all jets discriminants with a pT>20 GeV and |η| <2.3. The identiﬁcation was performed using a projective Log-LikeliHood score. The eﬃciencies were obtained using Z->ττ, Z'->ττ and W->τν Pythia8 samples. (Plot 5:) Background eﬃciencies for 1-prong τ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for loose (green), medium (blue) and tight (red) selection on all jets discriminants with a pT>20 GeV and |η| <2.3. The identiﬁcation was performed using a projective Log-LikeliHood score. The eﬃciencies were obtained using 2012 dijet data samples with an integrated luminosity of 740 pb-1. (Plot 6:) Signal eﬃciencies for multi-prong τ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for loose (green), medium (blue) and tight (red) selection on all jets discriminants with a pT>20 GeV and |η| <2.3. The identiﬁcation was performed using a projective Log-LikeliHood score. The eﬃciencies were obtained using Z->ττ, Z'->ττ and W->τν Pythia8 samples. (Plot 7:) Background eﬃciencies for multi-prong τ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for loose (green), medium (blue) and tight (red) selection on all jets discriminants with a pT>20 GeV and |η| <2.3. The identiﬁcation was performed using a projective Log-LikeliHood score. The eﬃciencies were obtained using 2012 dijet data samples with an integrated luminosity of 740 pb-1. (Plot 8:) Signal eﬃciencies for multi-prong τ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for loose (green), medium (blue) and tight (red) selection on all jets discriminants with a pT>20 GeV and |η| <2.3. The identiﬁcation was performed using a Boosted Decision Tree algorithm. The eﬃciencies were obtained using Z->ττ, Z'->ττ and W->τν Pythia8 samples. (Plot 9:) Background eﬃciencies for multi-prong τ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for loose (green), medium (blue) and tight (red) selection on all jets discriminants with a pT>20 GeV and |η| <2.3. The identiﬁcation was performed using a Boosted Decision Tree algorithm. The eﬃciencies were obtained using 2012 dijet data samples with an integrated luminosity of 740 pb-1.

### Performance Plots for Tau Identification in 2012 (12 Jun 2012)

 (Plot 1:) Signal eﬃciencies for 1-prong τ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for loose (green), medium (blue) and tight (red) selection for pT>20 GeV and |η| <2.3. The identiﬁcation was performed using a Boosted Decision Tree algorithm. The eﬃciencies were obtained using Z->ττ, Z'->ττ and W->τν Pythia8 samples. (Plot 2:) Background eﬃciencies for 1-prong τ candidates as a function of the number of reconstructed vertices for loose (green), medium (blue) and tight (red) selection for pT>20 GeV and |η| <2.3. The identiﬁcation was performed using a Boosted Decision Tree algorithm. The eﬃciencies were obtained using 2012 dijet data samples with an integrated luminosity of 740 pb-1. (Plot 3:) Inverse background eﬃciency as a function of the signal eﬃciency for 1-prong τ candidates with a pT > 20 GeV and |η| < 2.3. The signal eﬃciencies were obtained using Z->ττ,Z'->ττ and W->τν Pythia 8 samples, while the background efficiencies were derived using 2012 dijet data samples. (Plot 4:) Inverse background eﬃciency as a function of the signal eﬃciency for multi-prong τ candidates with a pT > 20 GeV and |η| < 2.3. Multi-prong τ candidates are deﬁned as reconstructed τ candidates with 2 or 3 tracks and for the signal efficiency only true τ leptons decaying into three charged particles are considered. The signal eﬃciencies were obtained using Z->ττ,Z'->ττ and W->τν Pythia 8 samples, while the background efficiencies were derived using 2012 dijet data samples.

<!-- ********************************************************* -->
<!-- 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) -->
<!-- Person responsible for the page:
Or replace the complete REVINFO tag (including percentages symbols) with a name in the form TwikiUsersName -->
<!-- Once this page has been reviewed, please add the name and the date e.g. StephenHaywood - 31 Oct 2006 -->