Plot  Description 
pdf png  Comparison of the primary vertex resolution in x vs pT sum of the associated tracks for 2015 (blue triangles) and 2016 (red rectangles). The degradation of the resolutions by 10 % is caused mainly by larger pixel dynamic inefficiency due to higher instantaneous luminosity in 2016, leading to larger fraction of tracks with hit missing from the innermost pixel barrel layer. In 2016 data the transverse resolution is better than 14 μm, and the longitudinal resolution is better than 19 μm for primary vertices with sum of track pT > 100 GeV. 
pdf png  Comparison of the primary vertex resolution in z vs pT sum of the associated tracks for 2015 (blue triangles) and 2016 (red rectangles). The degradation of the resolutions by 10 % is caused mainly by larger pixel dynamic inefficiency due to higher instantaneous luminosity in 2016, leading to larger fraction of tracks with hit missing from the innermost pixel barrel layer. In 2016 data the transverse resolution is better than 14 μm, and the longitudinal resolution is better than 19 μm for primary vertices with sum of track pT > 100 GeV. 
pdf png  Comparison of the primary vertex resolution in x vs the number of reconstructed vertices for 2015 (blue triangles) and 2016 (red rectangles). The degradation of the resolutions by 10 % is caused mainly by larger pixel dynamic inefficiency due to higher instantaneous luminosity in 2016, leading to larger fraction of tracks with hit missing from the innermost pixel barrel layer. 
pdf png  Comparison of the primary vertex resolution in z vs the number of reconstructed vertices for 2015 (blue triangles) and 2016 (red rectangles). The degradation of the resolutions by 10 % is caused mainly by larger pixel dynamic inefficiency due to higher instantaneous luminosity in 2016, leading to larger fraction of tracks with hit missing from the innermost pixel barrel layer. 
Plot  Description 
pdf gif  Kshort invariant mass reconstructed from oppositelycharged pion candidates in data. The fit is performed using a doublegaussian with a common mean for the signal plus a linear polynomial for the background. 
pdf gif  Lambda invariant mass reconstructed from oppositelycharged pion/proton candidates in data. The fit is performed using a doublegaussian with a common mean for the signal plus a quadratic polynomial for the background. 
pdf gif  Kshort invariant mass reconstructed from oppositelycharged pion candidates in simulation. The fit is performed using a doublegaussian with a common mean for the signal plus a linear polynomial for the background. 
pdf gif  Lambda invariant mass reconstructed from oppositelycharged pion/proton candidates in simulation. The fit is performed using a doublegaussian with a common mean for the signal plus a quadratic polynomial for the background. 
pdf gif  Kshort invariant mass as a function of eta for data (blue points) and simulation (red points). The shape is well described by simulation. The 0.5 MeV shift is attributed to imprecise modeling of detector material. 
pdf gif  Lambda invariant mass as a function of eta for data (blue) and simulation (red). The shape is well described by simulation. Note: The pion mass is used in the trajectory fit to account for material effects. 
pdf gif  Kshort invariant mass as a function of pT, phi, and the decay length for data (blue points) and simulation (red points) inside the central (top row) and forward (bottom row) regions. The decay length is the 3d distance from the Kshort vertex to the nearest primary vertex. The shape is well described by simulation. The 0.5 MeV shift is attributed to imprecise modeling of detector material. The pion momentum determination is uniform inside a 0.2% scale in the whole tracker volume. 
pdf gif  Lambda invariant mass as a function of pT, phi, and the decay length for data (blue points) and simulation (red points) inside the central (top row) and forward (bottom row) regions. The decay length is the 3d distance from the Lambda vertex to the nearest primary vertex. The shape is well described by simulation. Note: The pion mass is used in the trajectory fit to account for material effects. 
Plot  Description 

Data (black dots) and simulation (light blue rectangles) tracking efficiency for muons coming from the Z decay as a function of the absolute pseudorapidity(left) and the pseudorapidity(right) of the probe muon. 
Data (black dots) and simulation (light blue rectangles) tracking efficiency for muons coming from the Z decay as a function of the phi(left) and number of primary vertexes(right) of the probe muon. 

Data (black dots) and simulation (purple rectangles) tracking efficiency for muons coming from the Z decay as a function of the absolute pseudorapidity(left) and the pseudorapidity(right) of the probe muon for tracks in the Trackeronly seeded collection. 

Data (black dots) and simulation (light blue rectangles) tracking efficiency for muons coming from the Z decay as a function of the phi(left) and number of primary vertexes(right) of the probe muon for tracks in the Trackeronly seeded collection. 
Plot  Description 
Plot  Description 
pdf png  X position of the luminous region in CMS interaction point, with respect to the CMS reference frame centred on the mechanical support of the Tracker. The luminous region quantities are determined through a fit to the threedimensional distribution of the primary vertices and through a fit to the track impact parameter vs track φ distribution. These fits are performed for each luminosity section. Subsequently, the results are averaged over contiguous luminosity sections (Interval of Validity). An interval of validity is closed and a new one is opened if the boundary of 60 luminosity sections is reached or if any quantity drifts significantly. The resulting values for each IoV are shown in figure as a function of time using the single luminosity section (duration 23s) as unit. The data considered in this plot have been collected by CMS in 2016 during proton collisions at 13 TeV. Only DCScertified runs from 272760 to 275376 are included. 
pdf png  X transverse dimension of the luminous region in CMS interaction point, with respect to the CMS reference frame centred on the mechanical support of the Tracker. The luminous region quantities are determined through a fit to the threedimensional distribution of the primary vertices and through a fit to the track impact parameter vs track φ distribution. These fits are performed for each luminosity section. Subsequently, the results are averaged over contiguous luminosity sections (Interval of Validity). An interval of validity is closed and a new one is opened if the boundary of 60 luminosity sections is reached or if any quantity drifts significantly. The resulting values for each IoV are shown in figure as a function of time using the single luminosity section (duration 23s) as unit. The data considered in this plot have been collected by CMS in 2016 during proton collisions at 13 TeV. Only DCScertified runs from 272760 to 275376 are included. 
pdf png  Y transverse dimension of the luminous region in CMS interaction point, with respect to the CMS reference frame centred on the mechanical support of the Tracker. The luminous region quantities are determined through a fit to the threedimensional distribution of the primary vertices and through a fit to the track impact parameter vs track φ distribution. These fits are performed for each luminosity section. Subsequently, the results are averaged over contiguous luminosity sections (Interval of Validity). An interval of validity is closed and a new one is opened if the boundary of 60 luminosity sections is reached or if any quantity drifts significantly. The resulting values for each IoV are shown in figure as a function of time using the single luminosity section (duration 23s) as unit. The data considered in this plot have been collected by CMS in 2016 during proton collisions at 13 TeV. Only DCScertified runs from 272760 to 275376 are included. 
pdf png  Y transverse dimension of the luminous region in CMS interaction point, with respect to the CMS reference frame centred on the mechanical support of the Tracker. The luminous region quantities are determined through a fit to the threedimensional distribution of the primary vertices and through a fit to the track impact parameter vs track φ distribution. These fits are performed for each luminosity section. Subsequently, the results are averaged over contiguous luminosity sections (Interval of Validity). An interval of validity is closed and a new one is opened if the boundary of 60 luminosity sections is reached or if any quantity drifts significantly. The resulting values for each IoV are shown in figure as a function of time using the single luminosity section (duration 23s) as unit. The data considered in this plot have been collected by CMS in 2016 during proton collisions at 13 TeV. Only DCScertified runs from 272760 to 275376 are included. 
pdf png  Z position of the luminous region in CMS interaction point, with respect to the CMS reference frame centred on the mechanical support of the Tracker. The luminous region quantities are determined through a fit to the threedimensional distribution of the primary vertices and through a fit to the track impact parameter vs track φ distribution. These fits are performed for each luminosity section. Subsequently, the results are averaged over contiguous luminosity sections (Interval of Validity). An interval of validity is closed and a new one is opened if the boundary of 60 luminosity sections is reached or if any quantity drifts significantly. The resulting values for each IoV are shown in figure as a function of time using the single luminosity section (duration 23s) as unit. The data considered in this plot have been collected by CMS in 2016 during proton collisions at 13 TeV. Only DCScertified runs from 272760 to 275376 are included. 
pdf png  Z longitudinal dimension of the luminous region in CMS interaction point, with respect to the CMS reference frame centred on the mechanical support of the Tracker. The luminous region quantities are determined through a fit to the threedimensional distribution of the primary vertices and through a fit to the track impact parameter vs track φ distribution. These fits are performed for each luminosity section. Subsequently, the results are averaged over contiguous luminosity sections (Interval of Validity). An interval of validity is closed and a new one is opened if the boundary of 60 luminosity sections is reached or if any quantity drifts significantly. The resulting values for each IoV are shown in figure as a function of time using the single luminosity section (duration 23s) as unit. The data considered in this plot have been collected by CMS in 2016 during proton collisions at 13 TeV. Only DCScertified runs from 272760 to 275376 are included. 
I  Attachment  History  Action  Size  Date  Who  Comment 

BS_run2016B_X_to275376_byTime.pdf  r1  manage  62.0 K  20160729  11:24  SaraFiorendi  
png  BS_run2016B_X_to275376_byTime.png  r1  manage  52.5 K  20160729  11:21  SaraFiorendi  
BS_run2016B_Y_to275376_byTime.pdf  r1  manage  60.2 K  20160729  11:24  SaraFiorendi  
png  BS_run2016B_Y_to275376_byTime.png  r1  manage  51.3 K  20160729  11:21  SaraFiorendi  
BS_run2016B_Z_to275376_byTime.pdf  r1  manage  62.4 K  20160729  11:24  SaraFiorendi  
png  BS_run2016B_Z_to275376_byTime.png  r1  manage  63.6 K  20160729  11:21  SaraFiorendi  
BS_run2016B_beamWidthX_to275376_byTime.pdf  r1  manage  68.8 K  20160729  11:24  SaraFiorendi  
png  BS_run2016B_beamWidthX_to275376_byTime.png  r1  manage  52.8 K  20160729  11:21  SaraFiorendi  
BS_run2016B_beamWidthY_to275376_byTime.pdf  r1  manage  68.9 K  20160729  11:21  SaraFiorendi  
png  BS_run2016B_beamWidthY_to275376_byTime.png  r1  manage  53.3 K  20160729  11:21  SaraFiorendi  
BS_run2016B_sigmaZ_to275376_byTime.pdf  r1  manage  69.4 K  20160729  11:24  SaraFiorendi  
png  BS_run2016B_sigmaZ_to275376_byTime.png  r1  manage  62.8 K  20160729  11:21  SaraFiorendi  
gif  binnedMass.Kshort.gif  r1  manage  35.7 K  20160728  22:08  FrankJensen1  Kshort mass versus pt, phi, and the 3d decay length for data and simulation 
binnedMass.Kshort.pdf  r1  manage  35.5 K  20160728  22:08  FrankJensen1  Kshort mass versus pt, phi, and the 3d decay length for data and simulation  
gif  binnedMass.Lambda.gif  r1  manage  136.6 K  20160728  23:15  FrankJensen1  Lambda mass versus pt, phi, and the 3d decay length for data and simulation 
binnedMass.Lambda.pdf  r1  manage  63.4 K  20160728  23:15  FrankJensen1  Lambda mass versus pt, phi, and the 3d decay length for data and simulation  
eff_aeta_dr030e030_corr.pdf  r1  manage  15.5 K  20160728  17:05  EricaBrondolin  muon tracking efficiency plots (pdf version)  
png  eff_aeta_dr030e030_corr.png  r1  manage  18.3 K  20160729  15:51  EricaBrondolin  muon tracking efficiency plots (png version) 
eff_aeta_tk0_dr030e030_corr.pdf  r1  manage  15.4 K  20160728  17:14  EricaBrondolin  muon tracking efficiency plots for Trackerseeded only (pdf version)  
png  eff_aeta_tk0_dr030e030_corr.png  r1  manage  18.8 K  20160729  15:51  EricaBrondolin  muon tracking efficiency plots (png version) 
eff_eta2_dr030e030_corr.pdf  r1  manage  15.3 K  20160728  17:05  EricaBrondolin  muon tracking efficiency plots (pdf version)  
png  eff_eta2_dr030e030_corr.png  r1  manage  17.9 K  20160729  15:51  EricaBrondolin  muon tracking efficiency plots (png version) 
eff_eta2_tk0_dr030e030_corr.pdf  r1  manage  15.3 K  20160728  17:14  EricaBrondolin  muon tracking efficiency plots for Trackerseeded only (pdf version)  
png  eff_eta2_tk0_dr030e030_corr.png  r1  manage  18.5 K  20160729  15:51  EricaBrondolin  muon tracking efficiency plots (png version) 
eff_phi_dr030e030_corr.pdf  r1  manage  15.0 K  20160728  17:05  EricaBrondolin  muon tracking efficiency plots (pdf version)  
png  eff_phi_dr030e030_corr.png  r1  manage  16.9 K  20160729  15:51  EricaBrondolin  muon tracking efficiency plots (png version) 
eff_phi_tk0_dr030e030_corr.pdf  r1  manage  15.0 K  20160728  17:14  EricaBrondolin  muon tracking efficiency plots for Trackerseeded only (pdf version)  
png  eff_phi_tk0_dr030e030_corr.png  r1  manage  17.9 K  20160729  15:51  EricaBrondolin  muon tracking efficiency plots (png version) 
eff_vtx_dr030e030_corr.pdf  r1  manage  15.0 K  20160728  17:05  EricaBrondolin  muon tracking efficiency plots (pdf version)  
png  eff_vtx_dr030e030_corr.png  r1  manage  18.8 K  20160729  15:51  EricaBrondolin  muon tracking efficiency plots (png version) 
eff_vtx_tk0_dr030e030_corr.pdf  r1  manage  15.0 K  20160728  17:14  EricaBrondolin  muon tracking efficiency plots for Trackerseeded only (pdf version)  
png  eff_vtx_tk0_dr030e030_corr.png  r1  manage  19.5 K  20160729  15:51  EricaBrondolin  muon tracking efficiency plots (png version) 
gif  inclusiveMass.data.Kshort.gif  r1  manage  13.8 K  20160728  21:20  FrankJensen1  Kshort mass distribution in data 
inclusiveMass.data.Kshort.pdf  r1  manage  81.4 K  20160728  21:20  FrankJensen1  Kshort mass distribution in data  
gif  inclusiveMass.data.Lambda.gif  r1  manage  13.5 K  20160728  21:24  FrankJensen1  Lambda mass distribution in data 
inclusiveMass.data.Lambda.pdf  r1  manage  81.9 K  20160728  21:24  FrankJensen1  Lambda mass distribution in data  
gif  inclusiveMass.mc.Kshort.gif  r1  manage  13.1 K  20160728  21:23  FrankJensen1  Kshort mass distribution in simulation 
inclusiveMass.mc.Kshort.pdf  r1  manage  80.2 K  20160728  21:23  FrankJensen1  Kshort mass distribution in simulation  
gif  inclusiveMass.mc.Lambda.gif  r1  manage  12.6 K  20160728  21:25  FrankJensen1  Lambda mass distribution in simulation 
inclusiveMass.mc.Lambda.pdf  r1  manage  81.6 K  20160728  21:25  FrankJensen1  Lambda mass distribution in simulation  
gif  masscompare.eta.Kshort.gif  r1  manage  5.9 K  20160729  18:18  FrankJensen1  Kshort mass versus eta for data and simulation 
masscompare.eta.Kshort.pdf  r1  manage  16.5 K  20160729  18:18  FrankJensen1  Kshort mass versus eta for data and simulation  
gif  masscompare.eta.Lambda.gif  r1  manage  5.3 K  20160729  18:33  FrankJensen1  Lambda mass versus eta for data and simulation 
masscompare.eta.Lambda.pdf  r1  manage  16.3 K  20160729  18:33  FrankJensen1  Lambda mass versus eta for data and simulation  
resolution_nvertices_x.pdf  r1  manage  18.0 K  20160728  17:38  MattiKortelainen  Primary vertex resolution vs. number of reconstructed primary vertices  
png  resolution_nvertices_x.png  r1  manage  17.9 K  20160728  17:38  MattiKortelainen  Primary vertex resolution vs. number of reconstructed primary vertices 
resolution_nvertices_z.pdf  r1  manage  18.2 K  20160728  17:38  MattiKortelainen  Primary vertex resolution vs. number of reconstructed primary vertices  
png  resolution_nvertices_z.png  r1  manage  18.6 K  20160728  17:38  MattiKortelainen  Primary vertex resolution vs. number of reconstructed primary vertices 
resolution_sumpt_x.pdf  r1  manage  20.1 K  20160728  17:39  MattiKortelainen  Primary vertex resolution vs. sum pT of tracks used in the vertex fit  
png  resolution_sumpt_x.png  r1  manage  19.4 K  20160728  17:39  MattiKortelainen  Primary vertex resolution vs. sum pT of tracks used in the vertex fit 
resolution_sumpt_z.pdf  r1  manage  19.9 K  20160728  17:39  MattiKortelainen  Primary vertex resolution vs. sum pT of tracks used in the vertex fit  
png  resolution_sumpt_z.png  r1  manage  19.4 K  20160728  17:39  MattiKortelainen  Primary vertex resolution vs. sum pT of tracks used in the vertex fit 