| 1 |
claudioc |
1.1 |
|
| 2 |
|
|
\subsection{Single Lepton Top MC Modelling Validation from CR2}
|
| 3 |
|
|
\label{sec:cr2}
|
| 4 |
|
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
|
| 6 |
|
|
The \mt\ tail for single-lepton top events (\ttsl\ and single top) is dominated by jet resolution effects. The \W\ cannot be far off-shell because $\mW < \mtop$.
|
| 7 |
claudioc |
1.6 |
The modeling of the \mt\ tail from jet resolution effects is studied
|
| 8 |
|
|
using \zjets\ data and MC samples.
|
| 9 |
|
|
|
| 10 |
linacre |
1.8 |
\Z\ events are selected by requiring exactly 2 good leptons (satisfying ID
|
| 11 |
claudioc |
1.6 |
and isolation requirements) and requiring the \mll\ to be in the range
|
| 12 |
linacre |
1.8 |
$81-101$ GeV.
|
| 13 |
|
|
Events with additional isolated tracks are vetoed, as in Section~\ref{sec:tkveto}.
|
| 14 |
|
|
To reduce \ttbar\ backgrounds, events with a CSVM tag %H
|
| 15 |
claudioc |
1.6 |
are removed.
|
| 16 |
vimartin |
1.9 |
The positive lepton is treated as a neutrino and so is added to the MET: \met\ $\rightarrow$ \pt(\Lepp) + \met,
|
| 17 |
|
|
and the \mt\ is recalculated with the positive lepton \mt(\Lepm, \met).
|
| 18 |
claudioc |
1.1 |
The resulting ``pseudo-\mt'' is dominated by jet resolution effects, since no off-shell
|
| 19 |
|
|
\Z\ production enters the sample due to the \mll\ requirement.
|
| 20 |
|
|
This section describes how well the MC predicts the tail of ``pseudo-\mt''.
|
| 21 |
|
|
|
| 22 |
vimartin |
1.9 |
The underlying distributions are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:cr2met}.
|
| 23 |
|
|
%and~\ref{fig:cr2mtrest}.
|
| 24 |
|
|
We then perform the exact same type of Data/MC comparison and analysis as
|
| 25 |
|
|
described for CR1 in Section~\ref{sec:cr1}. For CR1 we collected
|
| 26 |
|
|
the data/MC tail information in
|
| 27 |
|
|
Table~\ref{tab:cr1yields} ; the equivalent for CR2 is
|
| 28 |
|
|
Table~\ref{tab:cr2yields}. For CR2 the statistics are not sufficient.
|
| 29 |
|
|
(for CR2 the statistics are not sufficient to split electrons and muons).
|
| 30 |
|
|
The last line of Table~\ref{tab:cr2yields} gives the data/MC scale factor
|
| 31 |
|
|
for the \ttbar\ lepton $+$ jets $M_T$ tail ($SFR_{top}$). This is
|
| 32 |
|
|
calculated in the same way as $SFR_{wjets}$ of Table~\ref{tab:cr1yields}.
|
| 33 |
|
|
Just as in CR1, there is an excess of data in the tails, as reflected
|
| 34 |
|
|
in the values of $SFR_{top}$. There are insufficient events to derive scale factors for
|
| 35 |
|
|
$\met\ > 150$~GeV. As a result, the scale factors derived from CR2 are
|
| 36 |
|
|
not used for the central prediction of the single-lepton top
|
| 37 |
|
|
background. They serve as a valuable cross check of the predictions
|
| 38 |
|
|
described in Section~\ref{sec:ttp}. The single lepton top predictions
|
| 39 |
|
|
obtained for SRA and SRB using the $SFR_{top}$ values described here
|
| 40 |
|
|
are consistent with the default predictions.
|
| 41 |
claudioc |
1.1 |
|
| 42 |
|
|
|
| 43 |
|
|
\begin{table}[!h]
|
| 44 |
|
|
\begin{center}
|
| 45 |
vimartin |
1.2 |
{\footnotesize
|
| 46 |
vimartin |
1.9 |
\begin{tabular}{l||c|c||c|c}
|
| 47 |
claudioc |
1.1 |
\hline
|
| 48 |
vimartin |
1.9 |
Sample & CR2PRESEL0 &CR2PRESEL1 & CR2A & CR2B \\
|
| 49 |
claudioc |
1.1 |
\hline
|
| 50 |
|
|
\hline
|
| 51 |
vimartin |
1.9 |
MC & $32 \pm 2$ & $28 \pm 2$ & $10 \pm 1$ & $10 \pm 1$ \\
|
| 52 |
|
|
Data & $50$ & $45$ & $17$ & $17$ \\
|
| 53 |
vimartin |
1.4 |
\hline
|
| 54 |
vimartin |
1.9 |
Data/MC & $1.56 \pm 0.24$ & $1.63 \pm 0.27$ & $1.68 \pm 0.45$ & $1.74 \pm 0.48$ \\
|
| 55 |
vimartin |
1.4 |
\hline
|
| 56 |
claudioc |
1.1 |
\hline
|
| 57 |
vimartin |
1.3 |
\hline
|
| 58 |
vimartin |
1.9 |
DY MC & $25 \pm 2$ & $20 \pm 2$ & $5 \pm 1$ & $5 \pm 1$ \\
|
| 59 |
|
|
DY Data & $42 \pm 7$ & $38 \pm 7$ & $12 \pm 4$ & $12 \pm 4$ \\
|
| 60 |
vimartin |
1.3 |
\hline
|
| 61 |
vimartin |
1.9 |
DY Data/MC & $1.73 \pm 0.32$ & $1.85 \pm 0.37$ & $2.37 \pm 0.96$ & $2.58 \pm 1.16$ \\
|
| 62 |
vimartin |
1.3 |
\hline
|
| 63 |
|
|
\hline
|
| 64 |
|
|
\hline
|
| 65 |
vimartin |
1.9 |
$SFR_{top}$ & $1.64 \pm 0.40$ & $1.74 \pm 0.46$ & $2.02 \pm 0.68$ & $2.16 \pm 0.75$ \\
|
| 66 |
claudioc |
1.1 |
\hline
|
| 67 |
vimartin |
1.2 |
\end{tabular}}
|
| 68 |
vimartin |
1.4 |
\caption{ Yields in \mt\ tail comparing the \zjets\ MC prediction (after
|
| 69 |
benhoob |
1.7 |
applying SFs) to data without subtracting the non-\zjets\ components (top table) and with subtracting the non-\zjets\ components (bottom table).
|
| 70 |
vimartin |
1.4 |
CR2PRESEL refers to a sample with $\met>50$ GeV and $\mt>150$ GeV.
|
| 71 |
claudioc |
1.1 |
\label{tab:cr2yields}}
|
| 72 |
|
|
\end{center}
|
| 73 |
|
|
\end{table}
|
| 74 |
|
|
|
| 75 |
vimartin |
1.9 |
%\hline
|
| 76 |
|
|
%$N_{1l-top}$ SF & - & - & $172 \pm 58$ & $119 \pm 42$ \\
|
| 77 |
|
|
%\hline
|
| 78 |
|
|
%$N_{1l-top}$ Opt/Pess & - & - & $256 \pm 131$ & $120 \pm 50$ \\
|
| 79 |
|
|
|
| 80 |
vimartin |
1.3 |
|
| 81 |
claudioc |
1.1 |
\begin{figure}[hbt]
|
| 82 |
|
|
\begin{center}
|
| 83 |
vimartin |
1.2 |
% \includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{plots/CR2plots/met_scaled_nj4_emucomb.pdf}%
|
| 84 |
|
|
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{plots/CR2plots/met_lepcor_scaled_nj4_emucomb.pdf}%
|
| 85 |
|
|
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{plots/CR2plots/mt_lepcor_scaled_nj4_emucomb.pdf}
|
| 86 |
|
|
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{plots/CR2plots/mt_lepcor_scaled_met50_nj4_emucomb.pdf}%
|
| 87 |
|
|
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{plots/CR2plots/mt_lepcor_scaled_met100_nj4_emucomb.pdf}
|
| 88 |
|
|
|
| 89 |
claudioc |
1.1 |
\caption{
|
| 90 |
benhoob |
1.7 |
Comparison of the pseudo-\met\ (top, left), pseudo-\mt\ (top,
|
| 91 |
vimartin |
1.2 |
right and bottom) distributions in data vs. MC for events
|
| 92 |
claudioc |
1.1 |
satisfying the requirements of CR2, combining both the muon and
|
| 93 |
benhoob |
1.7 |
electron channels. The pseudo-\mt\ distributions are shown
|
| 94 |
vimartin |
1.2 |
before any additional requirements (top, right) and after
|
| 95 |
benhoob |
1.7 |
requiring pseudo-\met $>$50 GeV (bottom, left) and pseudo-\met
|
| 96 |
claudioc |
1.6 |
$>$ 100 GeV (bottom, right) .
|
| 97 |
claudioc |
1.1 |
\label{fig:cr2met}
|
| 98 |
|
|
}
|
| 99 |
|
|
\end{center}
|
| 100 |
|
|
\end{figure}
|
| 101 |
|
|
|
| 102 |
vimartin |
1.9 |
%\begin{figure}[hbt]
|
| 103 |
|
|
% \begin{center}
|
| 104 |
|
|
% \includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{plots/CR2plots/mt_lepcor_scaled_met150_nj4_emucomb.pdf}%
|
| 105 |
|
|
% \includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{plots/CR2plots/mt_lepcor_scaled_met200_nj4_emucomb.pdf}
|
| 106 |
|
|
% \includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{plots/CR2plots/mt_lepcor_scaled_met250_nj4_emucomb.pdf}%
|
| 107 |
|
|
% \includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{plots/CR2plots/mt_lepcor_scaled_met300_nj4_emucomb.pdf}
|
| 108 |
|
|
% \caption{
|
| 109 |
|
|
% Comparison of the \mt\ distribution in data vs. MC for events
|
| 110 |
|
|
% satisfying the requirements of CR2, combining both the muon and
|
| 111 |
|
|
% electron channels. The pseudo-\met\ requirements used are
|
| 112 |
|
|
% 150 GeV (top, left), 200 GeV (top, right), 250 GeV (bottom,
|
| 113 |
|
|
% left) and 300 GeV (bottom, right).
|
| 114 |
|
|
%\label{fig:cr2mtrest}
|
| 115 |
|
|
%}
|
| 116 |
|
|
% \end{center}
|
| 117 |
|
|
%\end{figure}
|
| 118 |
benhoob |
1.7 |
\clearpage
|
