estimation method | Change for each parameter of the fitted correction function. 5 parametersmany measurements. take as error | reset each bin with randomly gaussian according to its error bar and re-fit the correction histogram. do 5000 times, take as error | Statistical error | Systematic error | total error | exist bias |
Previous analysis 1 | 0.09 plot2 | --- | 0.10 | 0.08* | 0.16 | 0.22 |
now analysis 2. Which method is reliable? | 0.39 plot1 | --- | 0.19 | 0.15** | 0.45 | 0.40 |
--- | 0.18 plot3 | 0.30 |
6bins | 7bins | 9bins | 13bins | 19bins | 25bins |
More fast data are produced, A are deduced from them (same data set, different random seed for b tagging)
datasets | with trigger, correct with correction function | with trigger, correction with histogram 25bins | with trigger, correction with histogram 13bins | with trigger, correction with histogram 7bins |
---|---|---|---|---|
fastdata1 | 0.710314 | 0.705644 | 0.695296 | 0.762789 |
fastdata2 | 0.452789 | 0.363568 | 0.333444 | 0.464422 |
fastdata3 | 0.923959 | 0.994478 | 0.613127 | 0.75341 |
fastdata4 | 0.437812 | 0.471541 | 0.386576 | 0.4666 |
fastdata5 | 0.354353 | 0.462082 | 0.374049 | 0.397047 |
fastdata6 | 0.540373 | 0.58203 | 0.496647 | 0.642595 |
fastdata7 | 0.443663 | 0.521005 | 0.278286 | 0.436368 |
fastdata8 | 0.616136 | 0.575533 | 0.527783 | 0.630022 |
fastdata9 | 0.452907 | 0.459436 | 0.368635 | 0.448882 |
average | 0.548034 | 0.570590778 | 0.452649222 | 0.555792778 |
RMS | 0.167008402 | 0.175541261 | 0.130990219 | 0.134222448 |
log
open new data...$HOME/analysisResults/forplots_3_jcali_Moore_MCALO_atlfast_btagemulation_jetprecalibration/ANA.ntuple.root open the 3nd data...$HOME/analysisResults/forplots_3_jcali_Moore_MCALO_btag60_HLT_AODlevelbugfix/ANA.ntuple.root In CalculateAndSetCorrectionFunction() in recons level, events=6104 A=-0.0178893 in parton level, events=253416 A=0.00158521 Correction function is 1.119092+(0.007044)*x+(-0.004921)*x*x+(-0.000065)*x*x*x+(0.000012)*x*x*x*x full A: mean: -0.0238551+/-0.0845253
In CalculateAndSetCorrectionFunction() in recons level, events=2523 A=-0.180958 in parton level, events=253416 A=0.00152187 Correction function is 1.109897+(-0.009322)*x+(-0.004660)*x*x+(0.000038)*x*x*x+(0.000012)*x*x*x*x full A: mean: 0.296882+/-0.118093 In CalculateAndSetCorrectionFunction() in recons level, events=2534 A=0.0872601 in parton level, events=253416 A=0.00152187 Correction function is 1.067744+(0.002200)*x+(-0.002326)*x*x+(-0.000007)*x*x*x+(0.000000)*x*x*x*x full A: mean: -0.275076+/-0.115798
AcerMC sample and MCNLO sample
Meaning of number
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
no-quality-cut | njet=4 | pt_e25GeV | Mttbar<550G | 8+9+pt_n/etmiss>0.99 |
11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | |
8+9+|Mw-80.4<20 | 8+9+|Mthad-175|<35 | 8+9+|Mtlep-175|<35 | 8+9+10+11+12+13 |
AcerMC and MCNLO
open new data...$HOME/analysisResults/5205_12605_jcali_atlfast/ANA.ntuple.root open the 3nd data...$HOME/analysisResults/5205_12605_jcali_fullsim_truthHardProc/ANA.ntuple.root In CalculateAndSetCorrectionFunction() Correction function is 0.958208+(-0.196741)*x+(0.183672)*x*x+(0.070694)*x*x*x+(-0.159684)*x*x*x*x the slope is: -0.391749+/-0.0914739 full A: mean: -0.446723+/-0.0966451 the slope is: -0.263819+/-0.0863646 fast A: mean: -0.281153+/-0.0906166 Info in <TCanvas::Print>: GIF file AcerMC_fitAd_measurement5.gif has been created open new data...$HOME/analysisResults/forplots_3_jcali_Moore_MCALO_atlfast_btagemulation_jetprecalibration/ANA.ntuple.root open the 3nd data...$HOME/analysisResults/forplots_3_jcali_Moore_MCALO_btag60_HLT_AODlevelbugfix/ANA.ntuple.root In CalculateAndSetCorrectionFunction() Correction function is 0.975217+(0.039795)*x+(0.051875)*x*x+(-0.176321)*x*x*x+(0.018757)*x*x*x*x the slope is: -0.108361+/-0.05298 full A: mean: -0.0732559+/-0.0472294 the slope is: 0.0759533+/-0.0486825 fast A: mean: -0.00752075+/-0.0432925 Info in <TCanvas::Print>: GIF file MCNLO_fitAd_measurement5.gif has been created // the old sample which has duplication problem open new data...$HOME/analysisResults/5205_jcali_atlfast/ANA.ntuple.root open the 3nd data...$HOME/analysisResults/5205_forplots_3_jcali_Moore_MCALO_btag60_HLT_truthHardProc/ANA.ntuple.root In CalculateAndSetCorrectionFunction() Correction function is 0.908255+(-0.257376)*x+(0.423997)*x*x+(0.301705)*x*x*x+(-0.342519)*x*x*x*x the slope is: -0.330671+/-0.0951342 full A: mean: -0.337228+/-0.0999412 the slope is: -0.13286+/-0.0882929 fast A: mean: -0.15723+/-0.0931127 Info in <TCanvas::Print>: GIF file AcerMC_fitAd_measurement5.gif has been created
without trigger | with trigger | (statistical error ~0.19) | |
method 1: A | 0.58 | 0.45 | |
mehtod 2: A | 0.59 | 0.49 | see plot |
method 1: Ad | -0.33 | -0.28 |
A_true | njet>=4 | njet>=4 && nbjet>=2 |
fast data | 0.307 | 0.316 |
full data | 0.306 | 0.394 |
SM value | measured value | ||
A | 0.42 | 0.31 | 0.16 |
Ad | -0.29 | -0.17 | 0.10 |
SM value | measured value | ||
A | 0.42 | 0.29 | 0.18 |
Ad | -0.29 | -0.12 | 0.11 |
the truth A=0.405, error 0.03 consistent with SM (with Mttba<550G) use data "eventnumber even" to get the correction function and measurement with data "eventnumber odd": A=0.48, error 0.23 (change to quality cut specially for atlfast, A=0.29, error 0.24 ) change the 2 parts of data: A=0.43, error 0.22 means the correction function inside atlfast works well, the bias is not from statisticas only.
It's fairly bad, before correction, "eventnumber odd" A=-0.01, "eventnumber even" A=0.51 use data "eventnumber even" to get the correction function and measurement with data "eventnumber odd": A=-0.84, error 0.23 change the 2 parts of data: A=1.10 error 0.23 Means statistical problem in full simulation data.....? More checks is done to distribution of reconstructed -9/0.51*cos\theta1*cos\theta2 for 2 parts of atlfull data directly without any correction. The means are -0.02 and 0.51 respectively, error 0.21 for both. If checks is done to their corresponding truth: The means are 0.46 and 0.37 respectively, error are similar. That means: for the small statistics, .
this is not the reason. 1. we give a weight to e and mu events, to adjust them to the same ratio in atlfast as in atlfull. the measure still gives in atlfull A=0.84. 2. We have tried to correct efficiency function using the fact that reco efficiency for atlfast and atlfull are different, and the correction doesn't work at all to A.* atlfull has more jets means more combk? * should use different quality cut for atlfast and atlfull, to decrease the bias, because the event reonstruction (mass distribution) are different for them
2. To look at , which is the mean of the distribution, in truth, it gives 0.005.
3. Use the correction function obtained from atlfast in the reconstruction level, the bias is 0.26.
4. If I take the cuts officially defined for T7 note and corresponding correction function, the bias is 0.36. The bias is same as study with AcerMC data.
* to look at the ratio of distribution of between full sim data and atlfast data. the data used are 3 types: semiemu; semiemu*goodlnb; semiemu*goodlnb*goodjjb and the distribution of ratios are similar and the bias on measurement of A is even larger. It means the background (tau events and cmbk) is not the reason of the bias.
Webs
Welcome Guest