| 1 |
vimartin |
1.1 |
|
| 2 |
|
|
\section{\ttd\ Jet Multiplicity Reweighting Procedure Information}
|
| 3 |
|
|
\label{app:ttdlnj}
|
| 4 |
|
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
|
| 6 |
|
|
\begin{figure}[hbt]
|
| 7 |
|
|
\begin{center}
|
| 8 |
|
|
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{plots/ttdl_njets_lepremoval_comp.png}
|
| 9 |
|
|
\caption{
|
| 10 |
|
|
\label{fig:dileptonnjets_lepcomp}%\protect
|
| 11 |
|
|
Comparison of the jet multiplicity distribution for \ttll\
|
| 12 |
|
|
events in MC in the signal sample before (red) and after
|
| 13 |
|
|
(blue) applying the lepton-jet overlap removal. Note only
|
| 14 |
|
|
the first 6 jets are shown.}
|
| 15 |
|
|
\end{center}
|
| 16 |
|
|
\end{figure}
|
| 17 |
|
|
|
| 18 |
|
|
|
| 19 |
|
|
In the signal sample, leptons mis-identified as jets are not rare.
|
| 20 |
|
|
Figure~\ref{fig:dileptonnjets_lepcomp} shows the MC jet
|
| 21 |
|
|
multiplicity distribution for \ttll\ events satisfying the full
|
| 22 |
|
|
selection criteria before and after subtracting leptons mis-identified
|
| 23 |
|
|
as jets. Approximately a quarter of the sample is comprised of 4-jet
|
| 24 |
|
|
events that actually correspond to a 2-lepton + 3 jet event where the second
|
| 25 |
|
|
lepton is counted as a jet. Lepton mis-identification depends strongly
|
| 26 |
|
|
on the type of second lepton, occuring more frequently in the case of
|
| 27 |
|
|
hadronic $\tau$s than leptonic objects. According to the \ttll\
|
| 28 |
|
|
MC, for hadronic $\tau$s, $\sim85\%$ of multi-prong $\tau$s and about half
|
| 29 |
|
|
the single-prong $\tau$ are mis-identified as jets. In the case of
|
| 30 |
|
|
leptonic objects, the fractions are smaller, comprising about a third
|
| 31 |
|
|
of \E/\M\ from a \W\ decay and $<20\%$ for leptonic $\tau$s,
|
| 32 |
|
|
mainly because of the softness of the decay products.
|
| 33 |
|
|
The scale factors listed in Table.~\ref{tab:njetskfactors} are applied
|
| 34 |
|
|
to the ``cleaned'' jet counts in the signal sample (shown in blue in
|
| 35 |
|
|
Figure~\ref{fig:dileptonnjets_lepcomp}). The impact of applying the
|
| 36 |
|
|
jet multiplicity scale factors on the \ttll\ is about a $10\%$ reduction in the
|
| 37 |
|
|
background prediction for the signal region.
|
| 38 |
|
|
|
| 39 |
|
|
%\begin{itemize}
|
| 40 |
|
|
%\item Hadronic ($\tau$) objects: most multi-prong $\tau$s and about
|
| 41 |
|
|
% half single-prong $\tau$s
|
| 42 |
|
|
%\item Leptonic objects: smaller fraction,
|
| 43 |
|
|
%\end{itemize}
|
| 44 |
|
|
%Fraction of various lepton types matched to a jet
|
| 45 |
|
|
%multi-prong taus ⟹ 85% give additional 30 GeV jet
|
| 46 |
|
|
%single-prong taus ⟹ ~50% give additional 30 GeV jet
|
| 47 |
|
|
%leptonic taus ⟹ <20% give additional 30 GeV jet
|
| 48 |
|
|
%e/mu⟹ ~40% give additional 30 GeV jet
|
| 49 |
|
|
|
| 50 |
|
|
\begin{figure}[hbt]
|
| 51 |
|
|
\begin{center}
|
| 52 |
|
|
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{plots/ttdl_njets_presel_3j_comp.png}%
|
| 53 |
|
|
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{plots/ttdl_njets_presel_4j_comp.png}
|
| 54 |
|
|
\caption{
|
| 55 |
|
|
\label{fig:dileptonnjets_signalcontrol_comp}%\protect
|
| 56 |
|
|
Comparison of the number of additional jets from radiation
|
| 57 |
|
|
in the 3-jet (left) and $\ge4$-jet (right) bins for the control \ttll\
|
| 58 |
|
|
sample (with two reconstructed leptons) and the signal
|
| 59 |
|
|
sample (with one reconstructed lepton). The distributions
|
| 60 |
|
|
show good agreement, indicating that the usage of the
|
| 61 |
|
|
reconstructed jet multiplicity in one sample to reweight the
|
| 62 |
|
|
signal sample is indeed justified. {\bf Fix me: Is this before or after the isolated track veto?}}
|
| 63 |
|
|
\end{center}
|
| 64 |
|
|
\end{figure}
|
| 65 |
|
|
|
| 66 |
|
|
Ultimately, the interesting quantity for reweighting is the number of
|
| 67 |
|
|
additional hard jets from radiation and this information is accessed using the
|
| 68 |
|
|
number of reconstructed
|
| 69 |
|
|
jets. Figure~\ref{fig:dileptonnjets_signalcontrol_comp}
|
| 70 |
|
|
demonstrates in MC that the \ttll\ control sample, i.e. when both leptons are reconstructed,
|
| 71 |
|
|
can indeed be used to reweight the \ttll\ signal sample, i.e. when one lepton is missed.
|
| 72 |
|
|
The figure compares the
|
| 73 |
|
|
number of additional jets from truth matching probed by N
|
| 74 |
|
|
reconstructed jets, in this case 3 and $\ge4$ jets. In order to do so,
|
| 75 |
|
|
jets that are truth-matched to the top decay products (the b-quarks
|
| 76 |
|
|
and additional leptons) are removed. The 3-jet distribution shows
|
| 77 |
|
|
excellent agreement and the differences in the $\ge4$-jet distribution
|
| 78 |
|
|
are at most $5\%$. The impact of possible differences in the
|
| 79 |
|
|
underlying distribution of extra
|
| 80 |
|
|
jets between the signal and control \ttll\ samples are estimated by
|
| 81 |
|
|
varying the scale factor contributions by $10\%$ and calculating the
|
| 82 |
|
|
change in the dilepton prediction. This effect is found to have a
|
| 83 |
|
|
negligible impact on the prediction, well below $1\%$.
|
| 84 |
|
|
|
| 85 |
|
|
Other effects that have been examined include the impact of
|
| 86 |
|
|
additional jets from pileup that may bias the jet multiplicity
|
| 87 |
|
|
distribution, which is found to be a negligible effect in this dataset. The
|
| 88 |
|
|
impact of the non-\ttll\ background on the jet fraction scale factors
|
| 89 |
|
|
has also been studied. In particular, given the large uncertainty on
|
| 90 |
|
|
the $\dy+HF$ MC prediction, this component has been varied by a factor
|
| 91 |
|
|
of 2 and the resulting change on the dilepton prediction is $<1\%$. As
|
| 92 |
|
|
a result, the dominant source of uncertainty is the statistical
|
| 93 |
|
|
uncertainty, primarily from the two-lepton control sample size, that
|
| 94 |
|
|
corresponds to a $3\%$ uncertainty on the dilepton prediction.
|
| 95 |
|
|
|
| 96 |
|
|
The scale factors for the fraction of additional jets in the dilepton
|
| 97 |
|
|
sample are applied throughout the analysis. It may be noted that this
|
| 98 |
|
|
scaling is also performed consistently for the alternative \ttbar\
|
| 99 |
|
|
samples, always reweighting the jet multiplicity distribution to the
|
| 100 |
|
|
data in the \ttll\ control sample. In this way, effects truly
|
| 101 |
|
|
arising from using different MC samples and settings can be examined,
|
| 102 |
|
|
separately from issues related to the modeling of additional jets.
|
| 103 |
|
|
|
| 104 |
|
|
|
