| 7 |
|
|
| 8 |
|
[UPDATE SELECTION] |
| 9 |
|
|
| 10 |
< |
The single lepton preselection sample is based on the following criteria |
| 10 |
> |
The single lepton preselection sample is based on the following criteria, starting from the requirements described |
| 11 |
> |
on \url{https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/viewauth/CMS/SUSYstop#SINGLE_LEPTON_CHANNEL} |
| 12 |
|
\begin{itemize} |
| 13 |
|
\item satisfy the trigger requirement (see |
| 14 |
< |
Table.~\ref{tab:DatasetsData}). Dilepton triggers are used only for the dilepton control region. |
| 14 |
> |
Table.~\ref{tab:DatasetsData}). |
| 15 |
> |
Note that the analysis triggers are inclusive single lepton triggers. |
| 16 |
> |
Dilepton triggers are used only for the dilepton control region. |
| 17 |
|
\item select events with one high \pt\ electron or muon, requiring |
| 18 |
|
\begin{itemize} |
| 19 |
< |
\item $\pt>30~\GeVc$ and $|\eta|<2.1$ |
| 20 |
< |
\item satisfy the identification and isolation requirements detailed |
| 21 |
< |
in the same-sign SUSY analysis (SUS-11-010) for electrons and the opposite-sign |
| 22 |
< |
SUSY analysis (SUS-11-011) for muons |
| 19 |
> |
\item $\pt>30~\GeVc$ and $|\eta|<1.4442 (2.4)$ for electrons (muons) |
| 20 |
> |
\item muon ID criteria is based on the 2012 POG recommended tight working point |
| 21 |
> |
\item electron ID critera is based on the 2012 POG recommended medium working point |
| 22 |
> |
\item PF-based isolation ($\Delta R < 0.3$, $\Delta\beta$ corrected) relative $<$ 0.15 and absolute $<$ 5~GeV |
| 23 |
> |
\item $|\pt(\rm{PF}_{lep}) - \pt(\rm{RECO}_{lep})| < 10~\GeV$ |
| 24 |
> |
\item $E/p_{in} < 4$ (electrons only) |
| 25 |
|
\end{itemize} |
| 26 |
|
\item require at least 4 PF jets in the event with $\pt>30~\GeV$ |
| 27 |
|
within $|\eta|<2.5$ out of which at least 1 satisfies the CSV |
| 29 |
|
\item require moderate $\met>50~\GeV$ |
| 30 |
|
\end{itemize} |
| 31 |
|
|
| 32 |
< |
Table~\ref{tab:preselectionyield} shows the yields in data and MC without any corrections for this preselection region. |
| 32 |
> |
%Table~\ref{tab:preselectionyield} shows the yields in data and MC without any corrections for this preselection region. |
| 33 |
|
|
| 34 |
< |
\begin{table}[!h] |
| 35 |
< |
\begin{center} |
| 36 |
< |
\begin{tabular}{c|c} |
| 37 |
< |
\hline |
| 38 |
< |
\hline |
| 39 |
< |
\end{tabular} |
| 40 |
< |
\caption{ Raw Data and MC predictions without any corrections are shown after preselection. \label{tab:preselectionyield}} |
| 41 |
< |
\end{center} |
| 42 |
< |
\end{table} |
| 34 |
> |
%\begin{table}[!h] |
| 35 |
> |
%\begin{center} |
| 36 |
> |
%\begin{tabular}{c|c} |
| 37 |
> |
%\hline |
| 38 |
> |
%\hline |
| 39 |
> |
%\end{tabular} |
| 40 |
> |
%\caption{ Raw Data and MC predictions without any corrections are shown after preselection. \label{tab:preselectionyield}} |
| 41 |
> |
%\end{center} |
| 42 |
> |
%\end{table} |
| 43 |
|
|
| 44 |
|
\subsection{Signal Region Selection} |
| 45 |
|
|
| 46 |
+ |
[MOTIVATIONAL BLURB ON MET AND MT, \\ |
| 47 |
+ |
CAN ADD SIGNAL VS. TTBAR MC PLOT \\ |
| 48 |
+ |
ADD SIGNAL YIELDS FOR AVAILABLE POINTS, \\ |
| 49 |
+ |
DISCUSS CHOICE SIG REGIONS] |
| 50 |
+ |
|
| 51 |
|
The signal regions (SRs) are selected to improve the sensitivity for the |
| 52 |
|
single lepton requirements and cover a range of scalar top |
| 53 |
|
scenarios. The \mt\ and \met\ variables are used to define the signal |
| 83 |
|
|
| 84 |
|
\begin{table}[!h] |
| 85 |
|
\begin{center} |
| 86 |
< |
\begin{tabular}{l||c|c|c|c} |
| 86 |
> |
\begin{tabular}{l||c|c|c|c|c} |
| 87 |
|
\hline |
| 88 |
< |
Sample & SRA & SRB & SRC & SRD \\ |
| 88 |
> |
Sample & SRA & SRB & SRC & SRD & SRE\\ |
| 89 |
|
\hline |
| 90 |
|
\hline |
| 91 |
< |
\ttdl\ & $700 \pm 15$& $408 \pm 12$& $134 \pm 7$& $43 \pm 4$ \\ |
| 92 |
< |
\ttsl\ \& single top (1\Lep) & $111 \pm 6$& $71 \pm 5$& $15 \pm 2$& $4 \pm 1$ \\ |
| 93 |
< |
\wjets\ & $58 \pm 35$& $57 \pm 35$& $29 \pm 26$& $26 \pm 26$ \\ |
| 94 |
< |
Rare & $63 \pm 3$& $40 \pm 3$& $17 \pm 2$& $7 \pm 1$ \\ |
| 91 |
> |
\ttdl\ & $619 \pm 9$& $366 \pm 7$& $127 \pm 4$& $44 \pm 2$& $17 \pm 1$ \\ |
| 92 |
> |
\ttsl\ \& single top (1\Lep) & $95 \pm 3$& $67 \pm 3$& $15 \pm 1$& $6 \pm 1$& $2 \pm 1$ \\ |
| 93 |
> |
\wjets\ & $29 \pm 2$& $15 \pm 2$& $6 \pm 1$& $3 \pm 1$& $1 \pm 0$ \\ |
| 94 |
> |
Rare & $59 \pm 3$& $38 \pm 3$& $16 \pm 2$& $8 \pm 1$& $4 \pm 1$ \\ |
| 95 |
|
\hline |
| 96 |
< |
Total & $932 \pm 39$& $576 \pm 38$& $195 \pm 27$& $80 \pm 26$ \\ |
| 96 |
> |
Total & $802 \pm 10$& $486 \pm 8$& $164 \pm 5$& $62 \pm 3$& $23 \pm 2$ \\ |
| 97 |
|
\hline |
| 98 |
|
\end{tabular} |
| 99 |
|
\caption{ Expected SM background contributions, including both muon |
| 100 |
< |
and electron channels. The uncertainties are statistical only. ADD |
| 100 |
> |
and electron channels. This is ``dead reckoning'' MC with no |
| 101 |
> |
correction. |
| 102 |
> |
It is meant only as a general guide. The uncertainties are statistical only. ADD |
| 103 |
|
SIGNAL POINTS. |
| 104 |
|
\label{tab:srrawmcyields}} |
| 105 |
|
\end{center} |
| 106 |
|
\end{table} |
| 107 |
|
|
| 96 |
– |
[1 PARAGRAPH BLURB ABOUT BACKGROUNDS AND INTRODUCE CONTROL REGIONS] |
| 97 |
– |
|
| 108 |
|
\subsection{Control Region Selection} |
| 109 |
|
|
| 110 |
+ |
[1 PARAGRAPH BLURB RELATING BACKGROUNDS (IN TABLE FROM PREVIOUS SECTION) |
| 111 |
+ |
TO INTRODUCE CONTROL REGIONS] |
| 112 |
+ |
|
| 113 |
|
Control regions (CRs) are used to validate the background estimation |
| 114 |
|
procedure and derive systematic uncertainties for some |
| 115 |
|
contributions. The CRs are selected to have similar |
| 172 |
|
|
| 173 |
|
\subsubsection{Corrections to Jets and \met} |
| 174 |
|
|
| 175 |
+ |
[UPDATE, ADD FEW MORE DETAILS ON WHAT IS DONE HERE] |
| 176 |
+ |
|
| 177 |
|
The official recommendations from the Jet/MET group are used for |
| 178 |
|
the data and MC samples. In particular, the jet |
| 179 |
|
energy corrections (JEC) are updated using the official recipe. |
| 219 |
|
\end{table} |
| 220 |
|
|
| 221 |
|
|
| 222 |
< |
\subsubsection{Modeling of Additional Hard Jets in Top Dilepton Events} |
| 208 |
< |
\label{sec:jetmultiplicity} |
| 222 |
> |
\subsubsection{Lepton Selection Efficiency Measurements} |
| 223 |
|
|
| 224 |
< |
[SUMMARIZE, UPDATE] |
| 224 |
> |
[TO BE UDPATED WITH T\&P STUDIES ON ID,ISO EFFICIENCIES] |
| 225 |
|
|
| 226 |
< |
Dilepton \ttbar\ events have 2 jets from the top decays, so additional |
| 227 |
< |
jets from radiation or higher order contributions are required to |
| 228 |
< |
enter the signal sample. The modeling of addtional jets in \ttbar\ |
| 229 |
< |
events is checked in a \ttll\ control sample, |
| 230 |
< |
selected by requiring |
| 231 |
< |
\begin{itemize} |
| 232 |
< |
\item exactly 2 selected electrons or muons with \pt $>$ 20 GeV |
| 233 |
< |
\item \met\ $>$ 100 GeV |
| 234 |
< |
\item $\geq1$ b-tagged jet |
| 235 |
< |
\item Z-veto |
| 236 |
< |
\end{itemize} |
| 237 |
< |
Figure~\ref{fig:dileptonnjets} shows a comparison of the jet |
| 238 |
< |
multiplicity distribution in data and MC for this two-lepton control |
| 239 |
< |
sample. After requiring at least 1 b-tagged jet, most of the |
| 240 |
< |
events have 2 jets, as expected from the dominant process \ttll. There is also a |
| 241 |
< |
significant fraction of events with additional jets. |
| 242 |
< |
The 3-jet sample is mainly comprised of \ttbar\ events with 1 additional |
| 243 |
< |
emission and similarly the $\ge4$-jet sample contains primarily |
| 244 |
< |
$\ttbar+\ge2$ jet events. Even though the primary \ttbar\ |
| 245 |
< |
Madgraph sample used includes up to 3 additional partons at the Matrix |
| 246 |
< |
Element level, which are intended to describe additional hard jets, |
| 247 |
< |
Figure~\ref{fig:dileptonnjets} shows a slight mis-modeling of the |
| 234 |
< |
additional jets. |
| 235 |
< |
|
| 236 |
< |
|
| 237 |
< |
\begin{figure}[hbt] |
| 238 |
< |
\begin{center} |
| 239 |
< |
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{plots/njets_all_met100_mueg.pdf} |
| 240 |
< |
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{plots/njets_all_met100_diel.pdf}% |
| 241 |
< |
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{plots/njets_all_met100_dimu.pdf} |
| 242 |
< |
\caption{ |
| 243 |
< |
\label{fig:dileptonnjets}%\protect |
| 244 |
< |
Comparison of the jet multiplicity distribution in data and MC for dilepton events in the \E-\M\ |
| 245 |
< |
(top), \E-\E\ (bottom left) and \M-\M\ (bottom right) channels.} |
| 246 |
< |
\end{center} |
| 226 |
> |
|
| 227 |
> |
\subsubsection{Trigger Efficiency Measurements} |
| 228 |
> |
|
| 229 |
> |
In this section we measure the efficiencies of the single lepton triggers, HLT\_IsoMu24(\_eta2p1) for muons and HLT\_Ele27\_WP80 for electrons, using a tag-and-probe |
| 230 |
> |
approach. The tag is required to pass the full offline analysis selection and have \pt\ $>$ 30 GeV, $|\eta|<2.1$, and be matched to the single |
| 231 |
> |
lepton trigger. The probe is also required to pass the full offline analysis selection and have $|\eta|<2.1$, but the \pt\ requirement is relaxed to 20 GeV |
| 232 |
> |
in order to measure the \pt\ turn-on curve. The tag-probe pair is required to have opposite-sign and an invariant mass in the range 76--106 GeV. |
| 233 |
> |
The measured trigger efficiencies are displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:trigeff} and summarized in Table~\ref{tab:mutriggeff} (muons) and Table~\ref{tab:eltriggeff} (electrons). |
| 234 |
> |
These trigger efficiencies will be applied to the MC when used to predict data yields selected by single lepton triggers. [THESE TRIGGER EFFICIENCIES TO BE APPLIED TO MC] |
| 235 |
> |
|
| 236 |
> |
|
| 237 |
> |
\begin{figure}[!ht] |
| 238 |
> |
\begin{center} |
| 239 |
> |
\begin{tabular}{cc} |
| 240 |
> |
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{plots/mutrig_pt_etabins.pdf} & |
| 241 |
> |
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{plots/eltrig_pt_etabins.pdf} \\ |
| 242 |
> |
\end{tabular} |
| 243 |
> |
\caption{\label{fig:trigeff} |
| 244 |
> |
Efficiency for the single muon trigger HLT\_IsoMu24(\_eta2p1) (left) and single electron trigger HLT\_Ele27\_WP80 (right) as a function of lepton \pt, |
| 245 |
> |
for several bins in lepton $|\eta|$. |
| 246 |
> |
} |
| 247 |
> |
\end{center} |
| 248 |
|
\end{figure} |
| 249 |
|
|
| 250 |
< |
It should be noted that in the case of \ttll\ events |
| 250 |
< |
with a single reconstructed lepton, the other lepton may be |
| 251 |
< |
mis-reconstructed as a jet. For example, a hadronic tau may be |
| 252 |
< |
mis-identified as a jet (since no $\tau$ identification is used). |
| 253 |
< |
In this case only 1 additional jet from radiation may suffice for |
| 254 |
< |
a \ttll\ event to enter the signal sample. As a result, both the |
| 255 |
< |
samples with $\ttbar+1$ jet and $\ttbar+\ge2$ jets are relevant for |
| 256 |
< |
estimating the top dilepton bkg in the signal region. |
| 257 |
< |
|
| 258 |
< |
%In this section we discuss a correction to $ N_{2 lep}^{MC} $ in Equation XXX |
| 259 |
< |
%due to differences in the modelling of the jet multiplicity in data versus MC. |
| 260 |
< |
%The same correction also enters $ N_{peak}^{MC}$ in Equation XXX to the extend that the |
| 261 |
< |
%dilepton contributions to $ N_{peak}^{MC}$ gets corrected. |
| 262 |
< |
|
| 263 |
< |
%The dilepton control sample is defined by the following requirements: |
| 264 |
< |
%\begin{itemize} |
| 265 |
< |
%\item Exactly 2 selected electrons or muons with \pt $>$ 20 GeV |
| 266 |
< |
%\item \met\ $>$ 50 GeV |
| 267 |
< |
%\item $\geq1$ b-tagged jet |
| 268 |
< |
%\end{itemize} |
| 269 |
< |
% |
| 270 |
< |
%This sample is dominated by \ttll. The distribution of \njets\ for data and MC passing this selection is displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:dilepton_njets}. |
| 271 |
< |
%We use this distribution to derive scale factors which reweight the \ttll\ MC \njets\ distribution to match the data. We define the following |
| 272 |
< |
%quantities |
| 273 |
< |
% |
| 274 |
< |
%\begin{itemize} |
| 275 |
< |
%\item $N_{2}=$ data yield minus non-dilepton \ttbar\ MC yield for \njets\ $\leq$ 2 |
| 276 |
< |
%\item $N_{3}=$ data yield minus non-dilepton \ttbar\ MC yield for \njets\ = 3 |
| 277 |
< |
%\item $N_{4}=$ data yield minus non-dilepton \ttbar\ MC yield for \njets\ $\geq$ 4 |
| 278 |
< |
%\item $M_{2}=$ dilepton \ttbar\ MC yield for \njets\ $\leq$ 2 |
| 279 |
< |
%\item $M_{3}=$ dilepton \ttbar\ MC yield for \njets\ = 3 |
| 280 |
< |
%\item $M_{4}=$ dilepton \ttbar\ MC yield for \njets\ $\geq$ 4 |
| 281 |
< |
%\end{itemize} |
| 282 |
< |
% |
| 283 |
< |
%We use these yields to define 3 scale factors, which quantify the data/MC ratio in the 3 \njets\ bins: |
| 284 |
< |
% |
| 285 |
< |
%\begin{itemize} |
| 286 |
< |
%\item $SF_2 = N_2 / M_2$ |
| 287 |
< |
%\item $SF_3 = N_3 / M_3$ |
| 288 |
< |
%\item $SF_4 = N_4 / M_4$ |
| 289 |
< |
%\end{itemize} |
| 290 |
< |
% |
| 291 |
< |
%And finally, we define the scale factors $K_3$ and $K_4$: |
| 292 |
< |
% |
| 293 |
< |
%\begin{itemize} |
| 294 |
< |
%\item $K_3 = SF_3 / SF_2$ |
| 295 |
< |
%\item $K_4 = SF_4 / SF_2$ |
| 296 |
< |
%\end{itemize} |
| 297 |
< |
% |
| 298 |
< |
%The scale factor $K_3$ is extracted from dilepton \ttbar\ events with \njets = 3, which have exactly 1 ISR jet. |
| 299 |
< |
%The scale factor $K_4$ is extracted from dilepton \ttbar\ events with \njets $\geq$ 4, which have at least 2 ISR jets. |
| 300 |
< |
%Both of these scale factors are needed since dilepton \ttbar\ events which fall in our signal region (including |
| 301 |
< |
%the \njets $\geq$ 4 requirement) may require exactly 1 ISR jet, in the case that the second lepton is reconstructed |
| 302 |
< |
%as a jet, or at least 2 ISR jets, in the case that the second lepton is not reconstructed as a jet. These scale |
| 303 |
< |
%factors are applied to the dilepton \ttbar\ MC only. For a given MC event, we determine whether to use $K_3$ or $K_4$ |
| 304 |
< |
%by counting the number of reconstructed jets in the event ($N_{\rm{jets}}^R$) , and subtracting off any reconstructed |
| 305 |
< |
%jet which is matched to the second lepton at generator level ($N_{\rm{jets}}^\ell$); $N_{\rm{jets}}^{\rm{cor}} = N_{\rm{jets}}^R - N_{\rm{jets}}^\ell$. |
| 306 |
< |
%For events with $N_{\rm{jets}}^{\rm{cor}}=3$ the factor $K_3$ is applied, while for events with $N_{\rm{jets}}^{\rm{cor}}\geq4$ the factor $K_4$ is applied. |
| 307 |
< |
%For all subsequent steps, the scale factors $K_3$ and $K_4$ have been |
| 308 |
< |
%applied to the \ttll\ MC. |
| 309 |
< |
|
| 310 |
< |
|
| 311 |
< |
Table~\ref{tab:njetskfactors} shows scale factors to correct the |
| 312 |
< |
fraction of events with additional jets in MC to the observed fraction |
| 313 |
< |
in data. These are applied to the \ttll\ MC throughout the entire analysis, i.e. whenever \ttll\ MC is used to estimate or subtract |
| 314 |
< |
a yield or distribution. |
| 315 |
< |
% |
| 316 |
< |
In order to do so, it is first necessary to count the number of |
| 317 |
< |
additional jets from radiation and exclude leptons mis-identified as |
| 318 |
< |
jets. A jet is considered a mis-identified lepton if it is matched to a |
| 319 |
< |
generator-level second lepton with sufficient energy to satisfy the jet |
| 320 |
< |
\pt\ requirement ($\pt>30~\GeV$). |
| 250 |
> |
\clearpage |
| 251 |
|
|
| 252 |
< |
\begin{table}[!ht] |
| 252 |
> |
\begin{table}[htb] |
| 253 |
|
\begin{center} |
| 254 |
< |
\begin{tabular}{l|c} |
| 254 |
> |
\footnotesize |
| 255 |
> |
\caption{\label{tab:mutriggeff} |
| 256 |
> |
Summary of the single muon trigger efficiency HLT\_IsoMu24(\_eta2p1). Uncertainties are statistical.} |
| 257 |
> |
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c} |
| 258 |
> |
|
| 259 |
> |
% Selection : (((((((((abs(tagAndProbeMass-91)<15)&&(qProbe*qTag<0))&&((eventSelection&2)==2))&&(HLT_IsoMu24_tag > 0))&&(tag->pt()>30.0))&&(abs(tag->eta())<2.1))&&(probe->pt()>20))&&(abs(probe->eta())<2.1))&&((leptonSelection&65536)==65536))&&((leptonSelection&131072)==131072) |
| 260 |
> |
% Probe trigger : HLT_IsoMu24_probe > 0 |
| 261 |
> |
% Total data yield : 5161723 |
| 262 |
> |
|
| 263 |
|
\hline |
| 326 |
– |
Jet Multiplicity Sample |
| 327 |
– |
& Data/MC Scale Factor \\ |
| 264 |
|
\hline |
| 265 |
+ |
\pt\ range [GeV] & $|\eta|<0.8$ & $0.8<|\eta|<1.5$ & $1.5<|\eta|<2.1$ \\ |
| 266 |
+ |
\hline |
| 267 |
+ |
20 - 22 & 0.00 $\pm$ 0.000 & 0.00 $\pm$ 0.000 & 0.00 $\pm$ 0.000 \\ |
| 268 |
+ |
22 - 24 & 0.03 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.05 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.11 $\pm$ 0.002 \\ |
| 269 |
+ |
24 - 26 & 0.87 $\pm$ 0.002 & 0.78 $\pm$ 0.002 & 0.76 $\pm$ 0.003 \\ |
| 270 |
+ |
26 - 28 & 0.90 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.81 $\pm$ 0.002 & 0.78 $\pm$ 0.002 \\ |
| 271 |
+ |
28 - 30 & 0.91 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.81 $\pm$ 0.002 & 0.79 $\pm$ 0.002 \\ |
| 272 |
+ |
30 - 32 & 0.91 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.81 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.80 $\pm$ 0.002 \\ |
| 273 |
+ |
32 - 34 & 0.92 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.82 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.80 $\pm$ 0.002 \\ |
| 274 |
+ |
34 - 36 & 0.93 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.82 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.81 $\pm$ 0.001 \\ |
| 275 |
+ |
36 - 38 & 0.93 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.83 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.81 $\pm$ 0.001 \\ |
| 276 |
+ |
38 - 40 & 0.93 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.83 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.82 $\pm$ 0.001 \\ |
| 277 |
+ |
40 - 50 & 0.94 $\pm$ 0.000 & 0.84 $\pm$ 0.000 & 0.82 $\pm$ 0.001 \\ |
| 278 |
+ |
50 - 60 & 0.95 $\pm$ 0.000 & 0.84 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.83 $\pm$ 0.001 \\ |
| 279 |
+ |
60 - 80 & 0.95 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.84 $\pm$ 0.002 & 0.83 $\pm$ 0.002 \\ |
| 280 |
+ |
80 - 100 & 0.94 $\pm$ 0.002 & 0.84 $\pm$ 0.004 & 0.83 $\pm$ 0.006 \\ |
| 281 |
+ |
100 - 150 & 0.94 $\pm$ 0.003 & 0.84 $\pm$ 0.005 & 0.83 $\pm$ 0.008 \\ |
| 282 |
+ |
150 - 200 & 0.93 $\pm$ 0.006 & 0.84 $\pm$ 0.011 & 0.82 $\pm$ 0.018 \\ |
| 283 |
+ |
$>$200 & 0.92 $\pm$ 0.010 & 0.82 $\pm$ 0.017 & 0.82 $\pm$ 0.031 \\ |
| 284 |
|
\hline |
| 330 |
– |
N jets $= 3$ (sensitive to $\ttbar+1$ extra jet from radiation) & $0.97 \pm 0.03$\\ |
| 331 |
– |
N jets $\ge4$ (sensitive to $\ttbar+\ge2$ extra jets from radiation) & $0.91 \pm 0.04$\\ |
| 285 |
|
\hline |
| 286 |
+ |
|
| 287 |
|
\end{tabular} |
| 334 |
– |
\caption{Data/MC scale factors used to account for differences in the |
| 335 |
– |
fraction of events with additional hard jets from radiation in |
| 336 |
– |
\ttll\ events. \label{tab:njetskfactors}} |
| 288 |
|
\end{center} |
| 289 |
|
\end{table} |
| 290 |
|
|
| 291 |
< |
|
| 341 |
< |
\begin{figure}[hbt] |
| 342 |
< |
\begin{center} |
| 343 |
< |
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{plots/ttdl_njets_lepremoval_comp.png} |
| 344 |
< |
\caption{ |
| 345 |
< |
\label{fig:dileptonnjets_lepcomp}%\protect |
| 346 |
< |
Comparison of the jet multiplicity distribution for \ttll\ |
| 347 |
< |
events in MC in the signal sample before (red) and after |
| 348 |
< |
(blue) applying the lepton-jet overlap removal. Note only |
| 349 |
< |
the first 6 jets are shown.} |
| 350 |
< |
\end{center} |
| 351 |
< |
\end{figure} |
| 352 |
< |
|
| 353 |
< |
|
| 354 |
< |
In the signal sample, leptons mis-identified as jets are not rare. |
| 355 |
< |
Figure~\ref{fig:dileptonnjets_lepcomp} shows the MC jet |
| 356 |
< |
multiplicity distribution for \ttll\ events satisfying the full |
| 357 |
< |
selection criteria before and after subtracting leptons mis-identified |
| 358 |
< |
as jets. Approximately a quarter of the sample is comprised of 4-jet |
| 359 |
< |
events that actually correspond to a 2-lepton + 3 jet event where the second |
| 360 |
< |
lepton is counted as a jet. Lepton mis-identification depends strongly |
| 361 |
< |
on the type of second lepton, occuring more frequently in the case of |
| 362 |
< |
hadronic $\tau$s than leptonic objects. According to the \ttll\ |
| 363 |
< |
MC, for hadronic $\tau$s, $\sim85\%$ of multi-prong $\tau$s and about half |
| 364 |
< |
the single-prong $\tau$ are mis-identified as jets. In the case of |
| 365 |
< |
leptonic objects, the fractions are smaller, comprising about a third |
| 366 |
< |
of \E/\M\ from a \W\ decay and $<20\%$ for leptonic $\tau$s, |
| 367 |
< |
mainly because of the softness of the decay products. |
| 368 |
< |
The scale factors listed in Table.~\ref{tab:njetskfactors} are applied |
| 369 |
< |
to the ``cleaned'' jet counts in the signal sample (shown in blue in |
| 370 |
< |
Figure~\ref{fig:dileptonnjets_lepcomp}). The impact of applying the |
| 371 |
< |
jet multiplicity scale factors on the \ttll\ is about a $10\%$ reduction in the |
| 372 |
< |
background prediction for the signal region. |
| 373 |
< |
|
| 374 |
< |
%\begin{itemize} |
| 375 |
< |
%\item Hadronic ($\tau$) objects: most multi-prong $\tau$s and about |
| 376 |
< |
% half single-prong $\tau$s |
| 377 |
< |
%\item Leptonic objects: smaller fraction, |
| 378 |
< |
%\end{itemize} |
| 379 |
< |
%Fraction of various lepton types matched to a jet |
| 380 |
< |
%multi-prong taus ⟹ 85% give additional 30 GeV jet |
| 381 |
< |
%single-prong taus ⟹ ~50% give additional 30 GeV jet |
| 382 |
< |
%leptonic taus ⟹ <20% give additional 30 GeV jet |
| 383 |
< |
%e/mu⟹ ~40% give additional 30 GeV jet |
| 384 |
< |
|
| 385 |
< |
\begin{figure}[hbt] |
| 386 |
< |
\begin{center} |
| 387 |
< |
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{plots/ttdl_njets_presel_3j_comp.png}% |
| 388 |
< |
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{plots/ttdl_njets_presel_4j_comp.png} |
| 389 |
< |
\caption{ |
| 390 |
< |
\label{fig:dileptonnjets_signalcontrol_comp}%\protect |
| 391 |
< |
Comparison of the number of additional jets from radiation |
| 392 |
< |
in the 3-jet (left) and $\ge4$-jet (right) bins for the control \ttll\ |
| 393 |
< |
sample (with two reconstructed leptons) and the signal |
| 394 |
< |
sample (with one reconstructed lepton). The distributions |
| 395 |
< |
show good agreement, indicating that the usage of the |
| 396 |
< |
reconstructed jet multiplicity in one sample to reweight the |
| 397 |
< |
signal sample is indeed justified. {\bf Fix me: Is this before or after the isolated track veto?}} |
| 398 |
< |
\end{center} |
| 399 |
< |
\end{figure} |
| 400 |
< |
|
| 401 |
< |
Ultimately, the interesting quantity for reweighting is the number of |
| 402 |
< |
additional hard jets from radiation and this information is accessed using the |
| 403 |
< |
number of reconstructed |
| 404 |
< |
jets. Figure~\ref{fig:dileptonnjets_signalcontrol_comp} |
| 405 |
< |
demonstrates in MC that the \ttll\ control sample, i.e. when both leptons are reconstructed, |
| 406 |
< |
can indeed be used to reweight the \ttll\ signal sample, i.e. when one lepton is missed. |
| 407 |
< |
The figure compares the |
| 408 |
< |
number of additional jets from truth matching probed by N |
| 409 |
< |
reconstructed jets, in this case 3 and $\ge4$ jets. In order to do so, |
| 410 |
< |
jets that are truth-matched to the top decay products (the b-quarks |
| 411 |
< |
and additional leptons) are removed. The 3-jet distribution shows |
| 412 |
< |
excellent agreement and the differences in the $\ge4$-jet distribution |
| 413 |
< |
are at most $5\%$. The impact of possible differences in the |
| 414 |
< |
underlying distribution of extra |
| 415 |
< |
jets between the signal and control \ttll\ samples are estimated by |
| 416 |
< |
varying the scale factor contributions by $10\%$ and calculating the |
| 417 |
< |
change in the dilepton prediction. This effect is found to have a |
| 418 |
< |
negligible impact on the prediction, well below $1\%$. |
| 419 |
< |
|
| 420 |
< |
Other effects that have been examined include the impact of |
| 421 |
< |
additional jets from pileup that may bias the jet multiplicity |
| 422 |
< |
distribution, which is found to be a negligible effect in this dataset. The |
| 423 |
< |
impact of the non-\ttll\ background on the jet fraction scale factors |
| 424 |
< |
has also been studied. In particular, given the large uncertainty on |
| 425 |
< |
the $\dy+HF$ MC prediction, this component has been varied by a factor |
| 426 |
< |
of 2 and the resulting change on the dilepton prediction is $<1\%$. As |
| 427 |
< |
a result, the dominant source of uncertainty is the statistical |
| 428 |
< |
uncertainty, primarily from the two-lepton control sample size, that |
| 429 |
< |
corresponds to a $3\%$ uncertainty on the dilepton prediction. |
| 430 |
< |
|
| 431 |
< |
The scale factors for the fraction of additional jets in the dilepton |
| 432 |
< |
sample are applied throughout the analysis. It may be noted that this |
| 433 |
< |
scaling is also performed consistently for the alternative \ttbar\ |
| 434 |
< |
samples, always reweighting the jet multiplicity distribution to the |
| 435 |
< |
data in the \ttll\ control sample. In this way, effects truly |
| 436 |
< |
arising from using different MC samples and settings can be examined, |
| 437 |
< |
separately from issues related to the modeling of additional jets. |
| 438 |
< |
|
| 439 |
< |
\subsubsection{Efficiency Corrections} |
| 440 |
< |
|
| 441 |
< |
[TO BE UDPATED WITH T\&P STUDIES ON ID, TRIGGER ETC] |
| 442 |
< |
|
| 443 |
< |
|
| 444 |
< |
\subsubsection{Dilepton control regions} |
| 445 |
< |
|
| 446 |
< |
We define a dilepton control region requiring two isolated leptons, $ee, e\mu$, or $\mu\mu$ to study the jet multiplicity in data and MC, and derive |
| 447 |
< |
scale factors based on their consistency. This study is documented in Section~\ref{sec:jetmultiplicity}. |
| 448 |
< |
|
| 449 |
< |
In this region we require: |
| 450 |
< |
\begin{itemize} |
| 451 |
< |
\item dilepton triggers |
| 452 |
< |
\item two leptons with $\pt > 20 \GeV$ that pass our lepton id and isolation |
| 453 |
< |
\item $\met > 50 \GeV$ |
| 454 |
< |
\item $\ge 1$ b-tag, SSV medium |
| 455 |
< |
\end{itemize} |
| 456 |
< |
|
| 457 |
< |
This sample is only partially overlapping with the single lepton preselection as it requires the dilepton rather than the single lepton triggers, and |
| 458 |
< |
differs in the $\pt$ requirement for the leading lepton. Table~\ref{tab:dileptonyield} shows the raw yields in data and MC prior to any corrections. |
| 459 |
< |
|
| 460 |
< |
\begin{table}[!h] |
| 291 |
> |
\begin{table}[htb] |
| 292 |
|
\begin{center} |
| 293 |
< |
\begin{tabular}{c|c} |
| 293 |
> |
\footnotesize |
| 294 |
> |
\caption{\label{tab:eltriggeff} |
| 295 |
> |
Summary of the single electron trigger efficiency HLT\_Ele27\_WP80. Uncertainties are statistical.} |
| 296 |
> |
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c} |
| 297 |
> |
|
| 298 |
> |
% Selection : (((((((((abs(tagAndProbeMass-91)<15)&&(qProbe*qTag<0))&&((eventSelection&1)==1))&&(HLT_Ele27_WP80_tag > 0))&&(tag->pt()>30.0))&&(abs(tag->eta())<2.1))&&(probe->pt()>20))&&(abs(probe->eta())<2.1))&&((leptonSelection&8)==8))&&((leptonSelection&16)==16) |
| 299 |
> |
% Probe trigger : HLT_Ele27_WP80_probe > 0 |
| 300 |
> |
% Total data yield : 3405966 |
| 301 |
> |
|
| 302 |
> |
\hline |
| 303 |
|
\hline |
| 304 |
+ |
\pt\ range [GeV] & $|\eta|<1.5$ & $1.5<|\eta|<2.1$ \\ |
| 305 |
+ |
\hline |
| 306 |
+ |
20 - 22 & 0.00 $\pm$ 0.000 & 0.00 $\pm$ 0.000 \\ |
| 307 |
+ |
22 - 24 & 0.00 $\pm$ 0.000 & 0.00 $\pm$ 0.001 \\ |
| 308 |
+ |
24 - 26 & 0.00 $\pm$ 0.000 & 0.02 $\pm$ 0.001 \\ |
| 309 |
+ |
26 - 28 & 0.08 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.18 $\pm$ 0.003 \\ |
| 310 |
+ |
28 - 30 & 0.61 $\pm$ 0.002 & 0.50 $\pm$ 0.004 \\ |
| 311 |
+ |
30 - 32 & 0.86 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.63 $\pm$ 0.003 \\ |
| 312 |
+ |
32 - 34 & 0.88 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.68 $\pm$ 0.003 \\ |
| 313 |
+ |
34 - 36 & 0.90 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.70 $\pm$ 0.002 \\ |
| 314 |
+ |
36 - 38 & 0.91 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.72 $\pm$ 0.002 \\ |
| 315 |
+ |
38 - 40 & 0.92 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.74 $\pm$ 0.002 \\ |
| 316 |
+ |
40 - 50 & 0.94 $\pm$ 0.000 & 0.76 $\pm$ 0.001 \\ |
| 317 |
+ |
50 - 60 & 0.95 $\pm$ 0.000 & 0.77 $\pm$ 0.002 \\ |
| 318 |
+ |
60 - 80 & 0.96 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.78 $\pm$ 0.003 \\ |
| 319 |
+ |
80 - 100 & 0.96 $\pm$ 0.002 & 0.80 $\pm$ 0.008 \\ |
| 320 |
+ |
100 - 150 & 0.96 $\pm$ 0.002 & 0.79 $\pm$ 0.010 \\ |
| 321 |
+ |
150 - 200 & 0.97 $\pm$ 0.004 & 0.76 $\pm$ 0.026 \\ |
| 322 |
+ |
$>$200 & 0.97 $\pm$ 0.005 & 0.81 $\pm$ 0.038 \\ |
| 323 |
|
\hline |
| 324 |
+ |
\hline |
| 325 |
+ |
|
| 326 |
|
\end{tabular} |
| 466 |
– |
\caption{ Raw Data and MC predictions without any corrections are shown for the dilepton control region. |
| 467 |
– |
This region is used for correcting the jet multiplicity seen in MC to that in data. |
| 468 |
– |
\label{tab:dileptonyield}} |
| 327 |
|
\end{center} |
| 328 |
|
\end{table} |
| 329 |
|
|
| 330 |
+ |
\clearpage |
