AtlasPublicTopicHeader.png

Hadronic Tau Performance

 
This page features public results from the ATLAS Tau Performance Group.

For preliminary public plots see bottom of page.

Filter Documents

Select the desired keywords to filter the results.
Selections within a section row are combined with a logical OR, while selections among different section rows are combined with a logical AND.
Global Selections
CM Energy
Performance selections
Signature
'OR' logic within row
'AND' between rows
Analysis characteristics
Min luminosity :   −1   
Date :   Filter by date:

Filtered results: [Papers Confnotes Pubnotes ]



Performance plots

Public collision data plots approved by the tau group which have not been superseded by notes/papers yet. (Superseded plots can be found here).

Performance Plot for Summer 2018 (May 2018) NEW


Tau Identification and Energy Scale performance: Preliminary Public Plots



Plots, more infos

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


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.



c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.png

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.



c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.png

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.



c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.png

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.



c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.png

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)


(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)

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


(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.





(Plot 2:) 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.



(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.



(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.





(Plot 5:) 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.





(Plot 6:) 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.





(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].





(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.





(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.




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.

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
pTvish) = 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.
Z->tautau candidate event display

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.


W->taunu candidate event display


Major updates:
MichelJanus - 2017-11-29

Responsible: YannCoadou
Subject: public

Topic attachments
I Attachment History Action Size Date Who Comment
Unknown file formateps 201202_tauid_bkgEff_1p_atlas.eps r1 manage 16.4 K 2017-12-07 - 10:24 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng 201202_tauid_bkgEff_1p_atlas.png r1 manage 29.8 K 2017-12-07 - 10:24 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps 201202_tauid_bkgEff_mp_atlas.eps r1 manage 16.7 K 2017-12-07 - 10:24 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng 201202_tauid_bkgEff_mp_atlas.png r1 manage 28.6 K 2017-12-07 - 10:24 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps 201202_tauid_roc_1p.eps r1 manage 11.9 K 2017-12-07 - 10:24 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng 201202_tauid_roc_1p.png r1 manage 31.6 K 2017-12-07 - 10:24 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps 201202_tauid_roc_mp.eps r1 manage 11.9 K 2017-12-07 - 10:24 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng 201202_tauid_roc_mp.png r1 manage 32.7 K 2017-12-07 - 10:24 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps 201202_tauid_sigEff_1p_atlas.eps r1 manage 15.2 K 2017-12-07 - 10:24 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng 201202_tauid_sigEff_1p_atlas.png r1 manage 27.9 K 2017-12-07 - 10:24 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps 201202_tauid_sigEff_mp_atlas.eps r1 manage 15.2 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng 201202_tauid_sigEff_mp_atlas.png r1 manage 28.2 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
PDFpdf 201520162017_1prong_mc16d_postfit.pdf r1 manage 19.2 K 2018-06-20 - 14:59 LucaFiorini mvis 2017
PNGpng 201520162017_1prong_mc16d_postfit.png r1 manage 23.2 K 2018-06-20 - 14:59 LucaFiorini mvis 2017
PDFpdf 201520162017_1prong_mc16d_prefit.pdf r1 manage 19.2 K 2018-06-20 - 14:59 LucaFiorini mvis 2017
PNGpng 201520162017_1prong_mc16d_prefit.png r1 manage 23.4 K 2018-06-20 - 14:59 LucaFiorini mvis 2017
PDFpdf 201520162017_3prong_mc16d_postfit.pdf r1 manage 19.3 K 2018-06-20 - 14:59 LucaFiorini mvis 2017
PNGpng 201520162017_3prong_mc16d_postfit.png r1 manage 24.9 K 2018-06-20 - 14:59 LucaFiorini mvis 2017
PDFpdf 201520162017_3prong_mc16d_prefit.pdf r1 manage 19.3 K 2018-06-20 - 14:59 LucaFiorini mvis 2017
PDFpdf 20152016_1prong_postfit.pdf r1 manage 19.3 K 2018-05-23 - 16:30 LucaFiorini mvis plots
PNGpng 20152016_1prong_postfit.png r1 manage 111.2 K 2018-05-23 - 16:30 LucaFiorini mvis plots
PDFpdf 20152016_1prong_prefit.pdf r1 manage 19.2 K 2018-05-23 - 16:30 LucaFiorini mvis plots
PNGpng 20152016_1prong_prefit.png r1 manage 110.4 K 2018-05-23 - 16:30 LucaFiorini mvis plots
PDFpdf 20152016_3prong_postfit.pdf r1 manage 19.5 K 2018-05-23 - 16:30 LucaFiorini mvis plots
PNGpng 20152016_3prong_postfit.png r1 manage 119.7 K 2018-05-23 - 16:30 LucaFiorini mvis plots
PDFpdf 20152016_3prong_prefit.pdf r1 manage 19.5 K 2018-05-23 - 16:30 LucaFiorini mvis plots
PNGpng 20152016_3prong_prefit.png r1 manage 119.3 K 2018-05-23 - 16:30 LucaFiorini mvis plots
PDFpdf 2017_1prong_mc16d_postfit.pdf r1 manage 19.2 K 2018-06-20 - 15:01 LucaFiorini mvis 2017
PNGpng 2017_1prong_mc16d_postfit.png r1 manage 24.3 K 2018-06-20 - 15:01 LucaFiorini mvis 2017
PDFpdf 2017_1prong_mc16d_prefit.pdf r1 manage 19.2 K 2018-06-20 - 15:01 LucaFiorini mvis 2017
PNGpng 2017_1prong_mc16d_prefit.png r1 manage 24.0 K 2018-06-20 - 15:01 LucaFiorini mvis 2017
PDFpdf 2017_3prong_mc16d_postfit.pdf r1 manage 19.4 K 2018-06-20 - 15:01 LucaFiorini mvis 2017
PNGpng 2017_3prong_mc16d_postfit.png r1 manage 25.8 K 2018-06-20 - 15:01 LucaFiorini mvis 2017
PDFpdf 2017_3prong_mc16d_prefit.pdf r1 manage 19.4 K 2018-06-20 - 15:01 LucaFiorini mvis 2017
PNGpng 2017_3prong_mc16d_prefit.png r1 manage 25.8 K 2018-06-20 - 15:01 LucaFiorini mvis 2017
Unknown file formateps BDT_Tau_ID_Score.eps r1 manage 27.5 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng BDT_Tau_ID_Score.png r1 manage 16.5 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps Bkg_Data2012_1P_FinalSetup_LLHvsMu.eps r1 manage 17.5 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng Bkg_Data2012_1P_FinalSetup_LLHvsMu.png r1 manage 18.5 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps Bkg_Data2012_MP_FinalSetup_BDTvsMu.eps r1 manage 17.2 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng Bkg_Data2012_MP_FinalSetup_BDTvsMu.png r1 manage 19.0 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps Bkg_Data2012_MP_FinalSetup_LLHvsMu.eps r1 manage 17.2 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng Bkg_Data2012_MP_FinalSetup_LLHvsMu.png r1 manage 18.5 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps CONFNOTEResolutionProng.eps r1 manage 9.3 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng CONFNOTEResolutionProng.png r1 manage 11.8 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps CalibrationFunctionProng1.eps r1 manage 673.3 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng CalibrationFunctionProng1.png r1 manage 15.0 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps CalibrationFunctionProng3.eps r1 manage 676.2 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng CalibrationFunctionProng3.png r1 manage 16.3 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps Eff_SignalComb_1P_FinalSetup_LLHvsMu.eps r1 manage 15.0 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng Eff_SignalComb_1P_FinalSetup_LLHvsMu.png r1 manage 17.1 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps Eff_SignalComb_MP_FinalSetup_BDTvsMu.eps r1 manage 14.9 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng Eff_SignalComb_MP_FinalSetup_BDTvsMu.png r1 manage 17.5 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps Eff_SignalComb_MP_FinalSetup_LLHvsMu.eps r1 manage 14.9 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng Eff_SignalComb_MP_FinalSetup_LLHvsMu.png r1 manage 17.3 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps ElectronVetoBackgroundEfficiencyNVertex.eps r1 manage 15.6 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng ElectronVetoBackgroundEfficiencyNVertex.png r1 manage 22.5 K 2017-12-07 - 10:27 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps ElectronVetoBackgroundEfficiencyPT.eps r1 manage 14.8 K 2017-12-07 - 10:27 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng ElectronVetoBackgroundEfficiencyPT.png r1 manage 22.3 K 2017-12-07 - 10:27 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps ElectronVetoBackgroundEfficiencyPTHigh.eps r1 manage 20.7 K 2017-12-07 - 10:27 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng ElectronVetoBackgroundEfficiencyPTHigh.png r1 manage 26.5 K 2017-12-07 - 10:27 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps ElectronVetoROC.eps r1 manage 13.5 K 2017-12-07 - 10:27 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng ElectronVetoROC.png r1 manage 31.4 K 2017-12-07 - 10:27 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps ElectronVetoSignalEfficiencyNVertex.eps r1 manage 16.1 K 2017-12-07 - 10:27 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng ElectronVetoSignalEfficiencyNVertex.png r1 manage 21.9 K 2017-12-07 - 10:27 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps ElectronVetoSignalEfficiencyPT.eps r1 manage 15.3 K 2017-12-07 - 10:27 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng ElectronVetoSignalEfficiencyPT.png r1 manage 21.6 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps ElectronVetoSignalEfficiencyPTHigh.eps r1 manage 19.5 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng ElectronVetoSignalEfficiencyPTHigh.png r1 manage 23.4 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps FinalTESu_0_03_1pFirstTry_1607.eps r1 manage 9.8 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng FinalTESu_0_03_1pFirstTry_1607.png r1 manage 17.7 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps FinalTESu_0_03_1pmc12_BDTMEDIUM.eps r1 manage 11.1 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng FinalTESu_0_03_1pmc12_BDTMEDIUM.png r1 manage 19.1 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps FinalTESu_16_25_3pFirstTry_1607.eps r1 manage 10.1 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng FinalTESu_16_25_3pFirstTry_1607.png r1 manage 19.1 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps FinalTESu_16_25_3pmc12_BDTMEDIUM.eps r1 manage 11.4 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng FinalTESu_16_25_3pmc12_BDTMEDIUM.png r1 manage 20.3 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps Mvis_2016.eps r1 manage 26.5 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng Mvis_2016.png r1 manage 18.6 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng ResolutionProng1-1.png r1 manage 16.7 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps ResolutionProng1.eps r1 manage 15.2 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps Visible_Mass_tau_mu.eps r1 manage 31.3 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng Visible_Mass_tau_mu.png r1 manage 17.5 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng WtaunuCand-155697-6769403.png r1 manage 1599.1 K 2017-12-07 - 10:29 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng WtaunuCand-155697-6769403_thumb.png r1 manage 39.8 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps Wtaunu_incFit_BDTM_OL.eps r1 manage 14.3 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng Wtaunu_incFit_BDTM_OL.png r1 manage 16.4 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps Wtaunu_incFit_NOID_OL.eps r1 manage 15.1 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng Wtaunu_incFit_NOID_OL.png r1 manage 18.8 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng Ztautau_event_display_run160613_event9209492_ed.png r1 manage 505.9 K 2017-12-07 - 10:29 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps bkg1P_BDTvsMu_Rebin_publicVersion.eps r1 manage 17.4 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng bkg1P_BDTvsMu_Rebin_publicVersion.png r1 manage 19.2 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.eps r1 manage 15.9 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_1P.png r1 manage 62.2 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.eps r1 manage 15.9 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng c_IDEffWRTTruth1PTauJets_ptGeV_log_3P.png r1 manage 62.6 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.eps r1 manage 15.5 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng c_ROCComparison_1Pposter.png r1 manage 72.2 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.eps r1 manage 15.8 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng c_ROCComparison_3Pposter.png r1 manage 74.3 K 2017-12-07 - 10:25 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps eff1P_BDTvsMu_Rebin_publicVersion.eps r1 manage 14.9 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng eff1P_BDTvsMu_Rebin_publicVersion.png r1 manage 16.6 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps effvsrej_1P_publicVersion.eps r1 manage 11.7 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng effvsrej_1P_publicVersion.png r1 manage 19.2 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps effvsrej_MP_publicVersion.eps r1 manage 11.9 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng effvsrej_MP_publicVersion.png r1 manage 19.8 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps effvsrej_MP_publicVersion_1.eps r1 manage 11.9 K 2017-12-07 - 10:26 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps fitMuHadNew_1PmP_PtEtaAll_bdtM.eps r1 manage 21.3 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng fitMuHadNew_1PmP_PtEtaAll_bdtM.png r1 manage 18.8 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
Unknown file formateps fitMuHadNew_inc_PtEtaAll_NoID.eps r1 manage 19.5 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
PNGpng fitMuHadNew_inc_PtEtaAll_NoID.png r1 manage 16.8 K 2017-12-07 - 10:28 GianlucaPicco  
PDFpdf roc.pdf r1 manage 74.6 K 2018-05-23 - 16:38 LucaFiorini Run2 bdt roc curve
PNGpng roc.png r1 manage 28.7 K 2018-05-23 - 16:38 LucaFiorini Run2 bdt roc curve
PDFpdf uncertainties_pt_1p-medium.pdf r1 manage 14.1 K 2018-05-23 - 16:33 LucaFiorini  
PNGpng uncertainties_pt_1p-medium.png r1 manage 78.1 K 2018-05-23 - 16:33 LucaFiorini  
PDFpdf uncertainties_pt_3p-medium.pdf r1 manage 14.5 K 2018-05-23 - 16:33 LucaFiorini  
PNGpng uncertainties_pt_3p-medium.png r1 manage 89.2 K 2018-05-23 - 16:33 LucaFiorini  
PDFpdf uncertainties_tes_eta_1p-medium.pdf r1 manage 15.0 K 2018-05-23 - 16:33 LucaFiorini  
PNGpng uncertainties_tes_eta_1p-medium.png r1 manage 78.9 K 2018-05-23 - 16:33 LucaFiorini  
PDFpdf uncertainties_tes_eta_3p-medium.pdf r1 manage 14.9 K 2018-05-23 - 16:35 LucaFiorini  
PNGpng uncertainties_tes_eta_3p-medium.png r1 manage 78.7 K 2018-05-23 - 16:35 LucaFiorini  
PDFpdf uncertainties_tes_pt_1p-medium.pdf r1 manage 14.3 K 2018-05-23 - 16:35 LucaFiorini  
PNGpng uncertainties_tes_pt_1p-medium.png r1 manage 78.8 K 2018-05-23 - 16:35 LucaFiorini  
PDFpdf uncertainties_tes_pt_3p-medium.pdf r1 manage 14.4 K 2018-05-23 - 16:35 LucaFiorini  
PNGpng uncertainties_tes_pt_3p-medium.png r1 manage 81.4 K 2018-05-23 - 16:35 LucaFiorini  
Edit | Attach | Watch | Print version | History: r24 < r23 < r22 < r21 < r20 | Backlinks | Raw View | WYSIWYG | More topic actions
Topic revision: r24 - 2018-06-22 - LucaFiorini
 
    • Cern Search Icon Cern Search
    • TWiki Search Icon TWiki Search
    • Google Search Icon Google Search

    Atlas All webs login

This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright & 2008-2018 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback