| 7 |
|
|
| 8 |
|
\begin{figure}[tbh] |
| 9 |
|
\begin{center} |
| 10 |
< |
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{plots_final/met_ht_349pb.pdf} |
| 10 |
> |
\includegraphics[width=0.65\linewidth]{plots_final/met_ht_349pb.pdf} |
| 11 |
|
\caption{\label{fig:met_ht}\protect Distributions of \MET\ vs.\ \HT\ |
| 12 |
|
for data. The high \MET\ (high \Ht) signal region is indicated with the |
| 13 |
|
blue dotted (red striped) region.} |
| 25 |
|
in this prediction, we add a single event ``by hand'' to the $g(H_T)$ distributiion |
| 26 |
|
at $H_T = 600$ GeV, leading to a predicted yield of 0.0 $\pm$ 0.6 (stat) $\pm$ 0.3 (syst). |
| 27 |
|
|
| 28 |
+ |
|
| 29 |
+ |
\begin{figure}[hbt] |
| 30 |
+ |
\begin{center} |
| 31 |
+ |
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{plots_final/abcdprime_349pb_highmet.pdf} |
| 32 |
+ |
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{plots_final/abcdprime_349pb_highht.pdf} |
| 33 |
+ |
\caption{\label{fig:abcdprimedata}\protect |
| 34 |
+ |
Distributions of $y$ vs. \Ht\ in data. The signal regions \met\ $>$ 275 GeV, \Ht\ $>$ 300 GeV (left) |
| 35 |
+ |
and \met\ $>$ 200 GeV, \Ht\ $>$ 600 GeV (right) are indicated with thick black lines. |
| 36 |
+ |
The $f(y)$ and $g(H_T)$ |
| 37 |
+ |
functions are measured using events in the green and red shaded areas, respectively. |
| 38 |
+ |
} |
| 39 |
+ |
\end{center} |
| 40 |
+ |
\end{figure} |
| 41 |
+ |
|
| 42 |
|
Next, we use the \ptll\ template method to predict the background in the 2 signal regions. |
| 43 |
|
For each signal region D, we count the number of events falling in the region D', which is |
| 44 |
< |
defined using the same requirements as D but switching the \MET\ requirement to a \ptll\ |
| 44 |
> |
defined using the same requirements as D but replacing the \MET\ requirement with a \ptll\ |
| 45 |
|
requirement. We subtract off the expected DY contribution using the data-driven $R_{out/in}$ |
| 46 |
< |
technique, We then scale this yield by 2 corrections factors: $K$, the \met\ acceptance |
| 46 |
> |
technique. We scale this yield by 2 corrections factors: $K$, the \met\ acceptance |
| 47 |
|
correction factor, and $K_C$, the correction factor determined in Sec.~\ref{sec:datadriven}. |
| 48 |
|
Our final prediction $N_P$ is given by: |
| 49 |
|
|
| 86 |
|
the observed yield is consistent with the predictions from MC and from the background estimates |
| 87 |
|
based on data. We conclude that no evidence for non-SM contributions to the signal regions |
| 88 |
|
is observed. |
| 75 |
– |
|
| 76 |
– |
\begin{table}[hbt] |
| 77 |
– |
\begin{center} |
| 78 |
– |
\caption{\label{tab:results} |
| 79 |
– |
Summary of the observed and predicted yields in the 2 signal regions. MC errors are statistical only. |
| 80 |
– |
} |
| 81 |
– |
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c|c} |
| 82 |
– |
\hline |
| 83 |
– |
& high \met\ signal region & high \Ht\ signal region \\ |
| 84 |
– |
\hline |
| 85 |
– |
Observed yield & 4 & 3 \\ |
| 86 |
– |
\hline |
| 87 |
– |
MC prediction & 2.6 $\pm$ 0.8 & 2.5 $\pm$ 0.8 \\ |
| 88 |
– |
ABCD' prediction & 1.2 $\pm$ 0.4 (stat) $\pm$ 0.5 (syst) & 0.0 $\pm$ 0.6 (stat) $\pm$ 0.3 (syst) \\ |
| 89 |
– |
\ptll\ prediction & 5.4 $\pm$ 3.8 (stat) $\pm$ 2.2 (syst) & 1.7 $\pm$ 1.7 (stat) $\pm$ 0.6 (syst) \\ |
| 90 |
– |
\hline |
| 91 |
– |
OF subtraction ($\Delta$) & 1.3 $\pm$ 1.9 (stat) $\pm$ 0.1 (syst) & 0.1 $\pm$ 1.5 (stat) $\pm$ 0.0 (syst) \\ |
| 92 |
– |
\hline |
| 93 |
– |
\end{tabular} |
| 94 |
– |
\end{center} |
| 95 |
– |
\end{table} |
| 96 |
– |
|
| 97 |
– |
|
| 98 |
– |
|
| 99 |
– |
|
