ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | Root Listing
root/cvsroot/UserCode/benhoob/cmsnotes/StopSearch/systematics.tex
(Generate patch)

Comparing UserCode/benhoob/cmsnotes/StopSearch/systematics.tex (file contents):
Revision 1.17 by claudioc, Fri Oct 12 02:41:46 2012 UTC vs.
Revision 1.19 by vimartin, Fri Oct 12 20:09:46 2012 UTC

# Line 25 | Line 25 | for example,
25   the $t\bar{t} \to$ dilepton BG estimate because it changes the
26   $t\bar{t}$ normalization to the peak region (because some of the
27   events in the peak region are from rare processes).  These effects
28 < are carefully accounted for.  The contribution to the overall
29 < uncertainty from each BG source is tabulated in
30 < Section~\ref{sec:bgunc-bottomline}.
31 < First, however, we discuss the uncertainties one-by-one and we comment
28 > are carefully accounted for.  
29 > %%%TO ADD BACK IN IF WE HAVE SYSTEMATICS TABLE.
30 > %The contribution to the overall
31 > %uncertainty from each BG source is tabulated in
32 > %Section~\ref{sec:bgunc-bottomline}.
33 > Here we discuss the uncertainties one-by-one and comment
34   on their impact on the overall result, at least to first order.
35   Second order effects, such as the one described, are also included.
36  
# Line 39 | Line 41 | These vary between 2\% and 20\%, dependi
41   signal regions have different \met\ requirements, thus they also have
42   different $M_T$ regions used as control.
43   Since
44 < the major BG, eg, $t\bar{t}$ are normalized to the peak regions, this
44 > the major backgrounds, eg, $t\bar{t}$ are normalized to the peak regions, this
45   fractional uncertainty is pretty much carried through all the way to
46   the end.  There is also an uncertainty from the finite MC event counts
47   in the $M_T$ peak regions.  This is also included, but it is smaller.
# Line 47 | Line 49 | in the $M_T$ peak regions.  This is also
49   Normalizing to the $M_T$ peak has the distinct advantages that
50   uncertainties on luminosity, cross-sections, trigger efficiency,
51   lepton ID, cancel out.
52 < For the low statistics regions with high \met requirements, the
53 < price to pay in terms of event count statistical uncertainties starts
52 > For the low statistics regions with high \met\ requirements, the
53 > price to pay in terms of event count is that statistical uncertainties start
54   to become significant.  In the future we may consider a different
55   normalization startegy in the low statistics regions.
56  
# Line 130 | Line 132 | BG goes down.
132   These tail-to-peak ratios are described in Section~\ref{sec:ttp}.
133   They are studied in CR1 and CR2.  The studies are described
134   in Sections~\ref{sec:cr1} and~\ref{sec:cr2}), respectively, where
135 < we also give the uncertainty on the scale factors.  See
135 > we also give the uncertainty on the scale factors (see
136   Tables~\ref{tab:cr1yields}
137 < and~\ref{tab:cr2yields}, scale factors $SFR_{wjet}$ and $SFR_{top})$.
137 > and~\ref{tab:cr2yields}, scale factors $SFR_{wjet}$ and $SFR_{top}$).
138  
139   \subsection{Uncertainty on extra jet radiation for dilepton
140    background}
# Line 142 | Line 144 | $t\bar{t} \to$
144   dilepton MC is rescaled by the factors $K_3$ and $K_4$ to make
145   it agree with the data.  The 3\% uncertainties on $K_3$ and $K_4$
146   comes from data/MC statistics.  This  
147 < result directly in a 3\% uncertainty on the dilepton BG, which is by far
147 > result directly in a 3\% uncertainty on the dilepton background, which is by far
148   the most important one.
149  
150 + \subsection{Uncertainty from MC statistics}
151 + This affects mostly the \ttll\ background estimate, which is taken
152 + from
153 + Monte Carlo with appropriate correction factors.  This uncertainty
154 + is negligible in the low \met\ signal regions, and grows to about
155 + 15\% in SRG.
156 +
157  
158   \subsection{Uncertainty on the \ttll\ Acceptance}
159  
# Line 176 | Line 185 | The variations considered are
185    Tauola and is otherwise identical to the Powheg sample.
186    This effect was studied earlier using 7~TeV samples and found to be negligible.
187   \item The PDF uncertainty is estimated following the PDF4LHC
188 <  recommendations[CITE]. The events are reweighted using alternative
188 >  recommendations. The events are reweighted using alternative
189    PDF sets for CT10 and MSTW2008 and the uncertainties for each are derived using the
190    alternative eigenvector variations and the ``master equation''. In
191    addition, the NNPDF2.1 set with 100 replicas. The central value is
# Line 288 | Line 297 | scale up/scale down variations are incon
297   These are described below.
298  
299   The first piece of information is that the jet multiplicity in the scale
300 < up/scale down sample is the most inconsistent with the data.  This can be shown
300 > up/scale down sample is the most inconsistent with the data.  This is shown
301   in Table~\ref{tab:njetskfactors_met100}, where we tabulate the
302 < $K_3$ and $K_4$ factors of Section~\ref{tab:njetskfactors_met100} for
302 > $K_3$ and $K_4$ factors of Section~\ref{sec:jetmultiplicity} for
303   different \ttbar\ MC samples.  The data/MC disagreement in the $N_{jets}$
304   distribution
305   for the scale up/scale down samples is also shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:dileptonnjets_scaleup}
# Line 355 | Line 364 | of 6\% would fully cover all of the vari
364   samples in SRA and SRB.
365   {\bf Thus, we take a 6\% systematic uncertainty,  constant as a
366   function of signal region, as the systematic due to alternative MC
367 < models.}.
367 > models.}
368   Note that this 6\% is also consistent with the level at which we are
369   able
370   to test the closure of the method in CR5 for the high statistics
# Line 592 | Line 601 | a second e/$\mu$ or a one prong $\tau \t
601   $P_T > 10$ GeV in $|\eta| < 2.4$.  This fraction is about 1/3, see
602   Table~\ref{tab:trueisotrk}.
603   The uncertainty for these events
604 < is 6\% and is obtained from Tag and Probe studies of Section~\ref{sec:trkveto}
604 > is 6\% and is obtained from tag-and-probe studies, see Section~\ref{sec:trkveto}.
605  
606   \begin{table}[!h]
607   \begin{center}
# Line 641 | Line 650 | decays are well-understood, we currently
650   Second, hadronic tracks may undergo nuclear interactions and hence their tracks may not be reconstructed.
651   As discussed above, independent studies show that the MC reproduces the hadronic tracking efficiency within 4\%,
652   leading to a total background uncertainty of less than 0.5\% (after taking into account the fraction of the total background
653 < due to hadronic $\tau$ decays with \pt\ $>$ 10 GeV tracks), and we hence regard this effect as neglgigible.
653 > due to hadronic $\tau$ decays with \pt\ $>$ 10 GeV tracks), and we hence regard this effect as negligible.
654  
655   The tag-and-probe studies are performed in the full data sample, and compared with the DYJets madgraph sample.
656   All events must contain a tag-probe pair (details below) with opposite-sign and satisfying the Z mass requirement 76--106 GeV.
# Line 698 | Line 707 | The specific criteria for tags and probe
707   The absolute track isolation distributions for passing probes are displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:tnp}. In general we observe
708   good agreement between data and MC. To be more quantitative, we compare the data vs. MC efficiencies to satisfy
709   absolute track isolation requirements varying from $>$ 1 GeV to $>$ 5 GeV, as summarized in Table~\ref{tab:isotrk}.
710 < In the $\geq$0 and $\geq$1 jet bins where the efficiencies can be tested with statistical precision, the data and MC
710 > In the $\geq 0$ and $\geq 1$ jet bins where the efficiencies can be tested with statistical precision, the data and MC
711   efficiencies agree within 6\%, and we apply this as a systematic uncertainty on the isolated track veto efficiency.
712   For the higher jet multiplicity bins the statistical precision decreases, but we do not observe any evidence for
713   a data vs. MC discrepancy in the isolated track veto efficiency.
# Line 731 | Line 740 | for events with the \njets\ requirement
740  
741   \begin{table}[!ht]
742   \begin{center}
734 \caption{\label{tab:isotrk} Comparison of the data vs. MC efficiencies to satisfy the indicated requirements
735 on the absolute track isolation, and the ratio of these two efficiencies. Results are indicated separately for electrons and muons and for various
736 jet multiplicity requirements.}
743   \begin{tabular}{l|c|c|c|c|c}
744  
745   %Electrons:
# Line 831 | Line 837 | $\mu$ + $\geq$4 jets   &           $>$ 1
837   \hline
838  
839   \end{tabular}
840 + \caption{\label{tab:isotrk} Comparison of the data vs. MC efficiencies to satisfy the indicated requirements
841 + on the absolute track isolation, and the ratio of these two efficiencies. Results are indicated separately for electrons and muons and for various
842 + jet multiplicity requirements.}
843   \end{center}
844   \end{table}
845  

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines