| 1 |
|
%\section{Systematics Uncertainties on the Background Prediction} |
| 2 |
|
%\label{sec:systematics} |
| 3 |
|
|
| 4 |
< |
[ADD INTRODUCTORY BLURB ON UNCERTAINTIES \\ |
| 5 |
< |
ADD COMPARISONS OF ALL THE ALTERNATIVE SAMPLES FOR ALL THE SIGNAL |
| 6 |
< |
REGIONS \\ |
| 7 |
< |
LIST ALL THE UNCERTAINTIES INCLUDED AND THEIR VALUES] |
| 4 |
> |
[DESCRIBE HERE ONE BY ONE THE UNCERTAINTIES THAT ARE PRESENT IN THE SPREADSHHET |
| 5 |
> |
FROM WHICH WE CALCULATE THE TOTAL UNCERTAINTY. WE KNOW HOW TO DO THIS |
| 6 |
> |
AND |
| 7 |
> |
WE HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY FROM THE 7 TEV ANALYSIS TO PROPAGATE ALL |
| 8 |
> |
UNCERTAINTIES |
| 9 |
> |
CORRECTLY THROUGH. WE WILL DO IT ONCE WE HAVE SETTLED ON THE |
| 10 |
> |
INDIVIDUAL PIECES WHICH ARE STILL IN FLUX] |
| 11 |
> |
|
| 12 |
> |
In this Section we discuss the systematic uncertainty on the BG |
| 13 |
> |
prediction. This prediction is assembled from the event |
| 14 |
> |
counts in the peak region of the transverse mass distribution as |
| 15 |
> |
well as Monte Carlo |
| 16 |
> |
with a number of correction factors, as described previously. |
| 17 |
> |
The |
| 18 |
> |
final uncertainty on the prediction is built up from the uncertainties in these |
| 19 |
> |
individual |
| 20 |
> |
components. |
| 21 |
> |
The calculation is done for each signal |
| 22 |
> |
region, |
| 23 |
> |
for electrons and muons separately. |
| 24 |
> |
|
| 25 |
> |
The choice to normalizing to the peak region of $M_T$ has the |
| 26 |
> |
advantage that some uncertainties, e.g., luminosity, cancel. |
| 27 |
> |
It does however introduce complications because it couples |
| 28 |
> |
some of the uncertainties in non-trivial ways. For example, |
| 29 |
> |
the primary effect of an uncertainty on the rare MC cross-section |
| 30 |
> |
is to introduce an uncertainty in the rare MC background estimate |
| 31 |
> |
which comes entirely from MC. But this uncertainty also affects, |
| 32 |
> |
for example, |
| 33 |
> |
the $t\bar{t} \to$ dilepton BG estimate because it changes the |
| 34 |
> |
$t\bar{t}$ normalization to the peak region (because some of the |
| 35 |
> |
events in the peak region are from rare processes). These effects |
| 36 |
> |
are carefully accounted for. The contribution to the overall |
| 37 |
> |
uncertainty from each BG source is tabulated in |
| 38 |
> |
Section~\ref{sec:bgunc-bottomline}. |
| 39 |
> |
First, however, we discuss the uncertainties one-by-one and we comment |
| 40 |
> |
on their impact on the overall result, at least to first order. |
| 41 |
> |
Second order effects, such as the one described, are also included. |
| 42 |
> |
|
| 43 |
> |
\subsection{Statistical uncertainties on the event counts in the $M_T$ |
| 44 |
> |
peak regions} |
| 45 |
> |
These vary between XX and XX \%, depending on the signal region |
| 46 |
> |
(different |
| 47 |
> |
signal regions have different \met\ requirements, thus they also have |
| 48 |
> |
different $M_T$ regions used as control. |
| 49 |
> |
Since |
| 50 |
> |
the major BG, eg, $t\bar{t}$ are normalized to the peak regions, this |
| 51 |
> |
fractional uncertainty is pretty much carried through all the way to |
| 52 |
> |
the end. There is also an uncertainty from the finite MC event counts |
| 53 |
> |
in the $M_T$ peak regions. This is also included, but it is smaller. |
| 54 |
> |
|
| 55 |
> |
\subsection{Uncertainty from the choice of $M_T$ peak region} |
| 56 |
> |
IN 7 TEV DATA WE HAD SOME SHAPE DIFFERENCES IN THE MTRANS REGION THAT |
| 57 |
> |
LED US TO CONSERVATIVELY INCLUDE THIS UNCERTAINTY. WE NEED TO LOOK |
| 58 |
> |
INTO THIS AGAIN |
| 59 |
> |
|
| 60 |
> |
\subsection{Uncertainty on the Wjets cross-section and the rare MC cross-sections} |
| 61 |
> |
These are taken as 50\%, uncorrelated. |
| 62 |
> |
The primary effect is to introduce a 50\% |
| 63 |
> |
uncertainty |
| 64 |
> |
on the $W +$ jets and rare BG |
| 65 |
> |
background predictions, respectively. However they also |
| 66 |
> |
have an effect on the other BGs via the $M_T$ peak normalization |
| 67 |
> |
in a way that tends to reduce the uncertainty. This is easy |
| 68 |
> |
to understand: if the $W$ cross-section is increased by 50\%, then |
| 69 |
> |
the $W$ background goes up. But the number of $M_T$ peak events |
| 70 |
> |
attributed to $t\bar{t}$ goes down, and since the $t\bar{t}$ BG is |
| 71 |
> |
scaled to the number of $t\bar{t}$ events in the peak, the $t\bar{t}$ |
| 72 |
> |
BG goes down. |
| 73 |
> |
|
| 74 |
> |
\subsection{Scale factors for the tail-to-peak ratios for lepton + |
| 75 |
> |
jets top and W events} |
| 76 |
> |
These tail-to-peak ratios are described in Section~\ref{sec:ttp}. |
| 77 |
> |
They are studied in CR1 and CR2. The studies are described |
| 78 |
> |
in Sections~\ref{sec:cr1} and~\ref{sec:cr2}), respectively, where |
| 79 |
> |
we also give the uncertainty on the scale factors. |
| 80 |
> |
|
| 81 |
> |
\subsection{Uncertainty on extra jet radiation for dilepton |
| 82 |
> |
background} |
| 83 |
> |
As discussed in Section~\ref{sec:jetmultiplicity}, the |
| 84 |
> |
jet distribution in |
| 85 |
> |
$t\bar{t} \to$ |
| 86 |
> |
dilepton MC is rescaled by the factors $K_3$ and $K_4$ to make |
| 87 |
> |
it agree with the data. The XX\% uncertainties on $K_3$ and $K_4$ |
| 88 |
> |
comes from data/MC statistics. This |
| 89 |
> |
result directly in a XX\% uncertainty on the dilepton BG, which is by far |
| 90 |
> |
the most important one. |
| 91 |
> |
|
| 92 |
|
|
| 93 |
|
\subsection{Uncertainty on the \ttll\ Acceptance} |
| 94 |
|
|
| 119 |
|
Pythia (LO). It may also be noted that MC@NLO uses Herwig6 for the |
| 120 |
|
hadronisation, while POWHEG uses Pythia6. |
| 121 |
|
\item Modeling of taus: The alternative sample does not include |
| 122 |
< |
Tauola and is otherwise identical to the Powheg sample. [DONE AT |
| 123 |
< |
7TEV AND FOUND TO BE NEGLIGIBLE] |
| 122 |
> |
Tauola and is otherwise identical to the Powheg sample. |
| 123 |
> |
This effect was studied earlier using 7~TeV samples and found to be negligible. |
| 124 |
|
\item The PDF uncertainty is estimated following the PDF4LHC |
| 125 |
|
recommendations[CITE]. The events are reweighted using alternative |
| 126 |
|
PDF sets for CT10 and MSTW2008 and the uncertainties for each are derived using the |
| 128 |
|
addition, the NNPDF2.1 set with 100 replicas. The central value is |
| 129 |
|
determined from the mean and the uncertainty is derived from the |
| 130 |
|
$1\sigma$ range. The overall uncertainty is derived from the envelope of the |
| 131 |
< |
alternative predictions and their uncertainties. [DONE AT 7 TEV AND |
| 132 |
< |
FOUND TO BE NEGLIGIBLE] |
| 133 |
< |
\end{itemize} |
| 131 |
> |
alternative predictions and their uncertainties. |
| 132 |
> |
This effect was studied earlier using 7~TeV samples and found to be negligible. |
| 133 |
> |
\end{itemize} |
| 134 |
|
|
| 135 |
|
|
| 136 |
|
\begin{figure}[hbt] |
| 144 |
|
alternative sample predictions are indicated by the |
| 145 |
|
datapoints. The uncertainties on the alternative predictions |
| 146 |
|
correspond to the uncorrelated statistical uncertainty from |
| 147 |
< |
the size of the alternative sample only.} |
| 147 |
> |
the size of the alternative sample only. |
| 148 |
> |
[TO BE UPDATED WITH THE LATEST SELECTION AND SFS]} |
| 149 |
|
\end{center} |
| 150 |
|
\end{figure} |
| 151 |
|
|
| 152 |
< |
|
| 152 |
> |
\clearpage |
| 153 |
|
|
| 154 |
|
% |
| 155 |
|
% |
| 285 |
|
%\end{center} |
| 286 |
|
%\end{table} |
| 287 |
|
|
| 288 |
+ |
\subsection{Uncertainty from the isolated track veto} |
| 289 |
+ |
This is the uncertainty associated with how well the isolated track |
| 290 |
+ |
veto performance is modeled by the Monte Carlo. This uncertainty |
| 291 |
+ |
only applies to the fraction of dilepton BG events that have |
| 292 |
+ |
a second e/$\mu$ or a one prong $\tau \to h$, with |
| 293 |
+ |
$P_T > 10$ GeV in $|\eta| < 2.4$. This fraction is 1/3 (THIS WAS THE |
| 294 |
+ |
7 TEV NUMBER, CHECK). The uncertainty for these events |
| 295 |
+ |
is XX\% and is obtained from Tag and Probe studies of Section~\ref{sec:trkveto} |
| 296 |
|
|
| 297 |
< |
\subsection{Isolated Track Veto: Tag and Probe Studies} |
| 297 |
> |
\subsubsection{Isolated Track Veto: Tag and Probe Studies} |
| 298 |
> |
\label{sec:trkveto} |
| 299 |
|
|
| 300 |
|
[EVERYTHING IS 7TEV HERE, UPDATE WITH NEW RESULTS \\ |
| 301 |
|
ADD TABLE WITH FRACTION OF EVENTS THAT HAVE A TRUE ISOLATED TRACK] |
| 344 |
|
|
| 345 |
|
\begin{itemize} |
| 346 |
|
\item Electron passes full analysis ID/iso selection |
| 347 |
< |
\item \pt\ $>$ 30 GeV, $|\eta|<2.5$ |
| 348 |
< |
|
| 255 |
< |
\item Matched to 1 of the 2 electron tag-and-probe triggers |
| 256 |
< |
\begin{itemize} |
| 257 |
< |
\item \verb=HLT_Ele17_CaloIdVT_CaloIsoVT_TrkIdT_TrkIsoVT_SC8_Mass30_v*= |
| 258 |
< |
\item \verb=HLT_Ele17_CaloIdVT_CaloIsoVT_TrkIdT_TrkIsoVT_Ele8_Mass30_v*= |
| 259 |
< |
\end{itemize} |
| 347 |
> |
\item \pt\ $>$ 30 GeV, $|\eta|<2.1$ |
| 348 |
> |
\item Matched to the single electron trigger \verb=HLT_Ele27_WP80_v*= |
| 349 |
|
\end{itemize} |
| 350 |
|
|
| 351 |
|
\item{Probe criteria} |
| 360 |
|
\begin{itemize} |
| 361 |
|
\item Muon passes full analysis ID/iso selection |
| 362 |
|
\item \pt\ $>$ 30 GeV, $|\eta|<2.1$ |
| 363 |
< |
\item Matched to 1 of the 2 electron tag-and-probe triggers |
| 363 |
> |
\item Matched to 1 of the 2 single muon triggers |
| 364 |
|
\begin{itemize} |
| 365 |
|
\item \verb=HLT_IsoMu30_v*= |
| 366 |
|
\item \verb=HLT_IsoMu30_eta2p1_v*= |
| 378 |
|
good agreement between data and MC. To be more quantitative, we compare the data vs. MC efficiencies to satisfy |
| 379 |
|
absolute track isolation requirements varying from $>$ 1 GeV to $>$ 5 GeV, as summarized in Table~\ref{tab:isotrk}. |
| 380 |
|
In the $\geq$0 and $\geq$1 jet bins where the efficiencies can be tested with statistical precision, the data and MC |
| 381 |
< |
efficiencies agree within 7\%, and we apply this as a systematic uncertainty on the isolated track veto efficiency. |
| 381 |
> |
efficiencies agree within 6\%, and we apply this as a systematic uncertainty on the isolated track veto efficiency. |
| 382 |
|
For the higher jet multiplicity bins the statistical precision decreases, but we do not observe any evidence for |
| 383 |
|
a data vs. MC discrepancy in the isolated track veto efficiency. |
| 384 |
|
|
| 389 |
|
|
| 390 |
|
\begin{figure}[hbt] |
| 391 |
|
\begin{center} |
| 392 |
< |
%\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/el_tkiso_0j.pdf}% |
| 393 |
< |
%\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/mu_tkiso_0j.pdf} |
| 394 |
< |
%\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/el_tkiso_1j.pdf}% |
| 395 |
< |
%\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/mu_tkiso_1j.pdf} |
| 396 |
< |
%\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/el_tkiso_2j.pdf}% |
| 397 |
< |
%\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/mu_tkiso_2j.pdf} |
| 398 |
< |
%\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/el_tkiso_3j.pdf}% |
| 399 |
< |
%\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/mu_tkiso_3j.pdf} |
| 400 |
< |
%\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/el_tkiso_4j.pdf}% |
| 401 |
< |
%\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/mu_tkiso_4j.pdf} |
| 392 |
> |
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/el_tkiso_0j.pdf}% |
| 393 |
> |
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/mu_tkiso_0j.pdf} |
| 394 |
> |
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/el_tkiso_1j.pdf}% |
| 395 |
> |
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/mu_tkiso_1j.pdf} |
| 396 |
> |
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/el_tkiso_2j.pdf}% |
| 397 |
> |
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/mu_tkiso_2j.pdf} |
| 398 |
> |
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/el_tkiso_3j.pdf}% |
| 399 |
> |
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/mu_tkiso_3j.pdf} |
| 400 |
> |
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/el_tkiso_4j.pdf}% |
| 401 |
> |
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{plots/mu_tkiso_4j.pdf} |
| 402 |
|
\caption{ |
| 403 |
|
\label{fig:tnp} Comparison of the absolute track isolation in data vs. MC for electrons (left) and muons (right) |
| 404 |
|
for events with the \njets\ requirement varied from \njets\ $\geq$ 0 to \njets\ $\geq$ 4. |
| 413 |
|
\caption{\label{tab:isotrk} Comparison of the data vs. MC efficiencies to satisfy the indicated requirements |
| 414 |
|
on the absolute track isolation, and the ratio of these two efficiencies. Results are indicated separately for electrons and muons and for various |
| 415 |
|
jet multiplicity requirements.} |
| 416 |
< |
\begin{tabular}{l|l|c|c|c|c|c} |
| 416 |
> |
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c|c|c|c} |
| 417 |
> |
|
| 418 |
> |
%Electrons: |
| 419 |
> |
%Selection : ((((((((((abs(tagAndProbeMass-91)<15)&&(qProbe*qTag<0))&&((eventSelection&1)==1))&&(abs(tag->eta())<2.1))&&(tag->pt()>30.0))&&(HLT_Ele27_WP80_tag > 0))&&(met<30))&&(nbl==0))&&((leptonSelection&8)==8))&&(probe->pt()>30))&&(drprobe<0.05) |
| 420 |
> |
%Total MC yields : 2497277 |
| 421 |
> |
%Total DATA yields : 2649453 |
| 422 |
> |
%Muons: |
| 423 |
> |
%Selection : ((((((((((abs(tagAndProbeMass-91)<15)&&(qProbe*qTag<0))&&((eventSelection&2)==2))&&(abs(tag->eta())<2.1))&&(tag->pt()>30.0))&&(HLT_IsoMu24_tag > 0))&&(met<30))&&(nbl==0))&&((leptonSelection&65536)==65536))&&(probe->pt()>30))&&(drprobe<0.05) |
| 424 |
> |
%Total MC yields : 3749863 |
| 425 |
> |
%Total DATA yields : 4210022 |
| 426 |
> |
%Info in <TCanvas::MakeDefCanvas>: created default TCanvas with name c1 |
| 427 |
> |
%Info in <TCanvas::Print>: pdf file plots/nvtx.pdf has been created |
| 428 |
> |
|
| 429 |
|
\hline |
| 430 |
|
\hline |
| 431 |
< |
e + $\geq$0 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 431 |
> |
e + $\geq$0 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 432 |
|
\hline |
| 433 |
< |
data & 0.088 $\pm$ 0.0003 & 0.030 $\pm$ 0.0002 & 0.013 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.007 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.005 $\pm$ 0.0001 \\ |
| 434 |
< |
mc & 0.087 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.030 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.014 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.008 $\pm$ 0.0000 & 0.005 $\pm$ 0.0000 \\ |
| 435 |
< |
data/mc & 1.01 $\pm$ 0.00 & 0.99 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.97 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.95 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.93 $\pm$ 0.01 \\ |
| 433 |
> |
data & 0.098 $\pm$ 0.0002 & 0.036 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.016 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.009 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.006 $\pm$ 0.0000 \\ |
| 434 |
> |
mc & 0.097 $\pm$ 0.0002 & 0.034 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.016 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.009 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.005 $\pm$ 0.0000 \\ |
| 435 |
> |
data/mc & 1.00 $\pm$ 0.00 & 1.04 $\pm$ 0.00 & 1.04 $\pm$ 0.01 & 1.03 $\pm$ 0.01 & 1.02 $\pm$ 0.01 \\ |
| 436 |
> |
|
| 437 |
|
\hline |
| 438 |
|
\hline |
| 439 |
< |
$\mu$ + $\geq$0 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 439 |
> |
$\mu$ + $\geq$0 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 440 |
|
\hline |
| 441 |
< |
data & 0.087 $\pm$ 0.0002 & 0.031 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.015 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.008 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.005 $\pm$ 0.0001 \\ |
| 442 |
< |
mc & 0.085 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.030 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.014 $\pm$ 0.0000 & 0.008 $\pm$ 0.0000 & 0.005 $\pm$ 0.0000 \\ |
| 443 |
< |
data/mc & 1.02 $\pm$ 0.00 & 1.06 $\pm$ 0.00 & 1.06 $\pm$ 0.01 & 1.03 $\pm$ 0.01 & 1.02 $\pm$ 0.01 \\ |
| 441 |
> |
data & 0.094 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.034 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.016 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.009 $\pm$ 0.0000 & 0.006 $\pm$ 0.0000 \\ |
| 442 |
> |
mc & 0.093 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.033 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.015 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.009 $\pm$ 0.0000 & 0.006 $\pm$ 0.0000 \\ |
| 443 |
> |
data/mc & 1.01 $\pm$ 0.00 & 1.03 $\pm$ 0.00 & 1.03 $\pm$ 0.01 & 1.03 $\pm$ 0.01 & 1.02 $\pm$ 0.01 \\ |
| 444 |
> |
|
| 445 |
|
\hline |
| 343 |
– |
\hline |
| 344 |
– |
e + $\geq$1 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 446 |
|
\hline |
| 447 |
< |
data & 0.099 $\pm$ 0.0008 & 0.038 $\pm$ 0.0005 & 0.019 $\pm$ 0.0004 & 0.011 $\pm$ 0.0003 & 0.008 $\pm$ 0.0002 \\ |
| 347 |
< |
mc & 0.100 $\pm$ 0.0004 & 0.038 $\pm$ 0.0003 & 0.019 $\pm$ 0.0002 & 0.012 $\pm$ 0.0002 & 0.008 $\pm$ 0.0001 \\ |
| 348 |
< |
data/mc & 0.99 $\pm$ 0.01 & 1.00 $\pm$ 0.02 & 0.99 $\pm$ 0.02 & 0.98 $\pm$ 0.03 & 0.97 $\pm$ 0.03 \\ |
| 447 |
> |
e + $\geq$1 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 448 |
|
\hline |
| 449 |
+ |
data & 0.110 $\pm$ 0.0005 & 0.044 $\pm$ 0.0003 & 0.022 $\pm$ 0.0002 & 0.014 $\pm$ 0.0002 & 0.009 $\pm$ 0.0002 \\ |
| 450 |
+ |
mc & 0.110 $\pm$ 0.0005 & 0.042 $\pm$ 0.0003 & 0.021 $\pm$ 0.0002 & 0.013 $\pm$ 0.0002 & 0.009 $\pm$ 0.0001 \\ |
| 451 |
+ |
data/mc & 1.00 $\pm$ 0.01 & 1.04 $\pm$ 0.01 & 1.06 $\pm$ 0.02 & 1.08 $\pm$ 0.02 & 1.06 $\pm$ 0.03 \\ |
| 452 |
+ |
|
| 453 |
|
\hline |
| 351 |
– |
$\mu$ + $\geq$1 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 454 |
|
\hline |
| 455 |
< |
data & 0.100 $\pm$ 0.0006 & 0.041 $\pm$ 0.0004 & 0.022 $\pm$ 0.0003 & 0.014 $\pm$ 0.0002 & 0.010 $\pm$ 0.0002 \\ |
| 354 |
< |
mc & 0.099 $\pm$ 0.0004 & 0.039 $\pm$ 0.0002 & 0.020 $\pm$ 0.0002 & 0.013 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.009 $\pm$ 0.0001 \\ |
| 355 |
< |
data/mc & 1.01 $\pm$ 0.01 & 1.05 $\pm$ 0.01 & 1.05 $\pm$ 0.02 & 1.06 $\pm$ 0.02 & 1.06 $\pm$ 0.03 \\ |
| 455 |
> |
$\mu$ + $\geq$1 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 456 |
|
\hline |
| 457 |
+ |
data & 0.106 $\pm$ 0.0004 & 0.043 $\pm$ 0.0003 & 0.023 $\pm$ 0.0002 & 0.014 $\pm$ 0.0002 & 0.010 $\pm$ 0.0001 \\ |
| 458 |
+ |
mc & 0.106 $\pm$ 0.0004 & 0.042 $\pm$ 0.0003 & 0.021 $\pm$ 0.0002 & 0.013 $\pm$ 0.0002 & 0.009 $\pm$ 0.0001 \\ |
| 459 |
+ |
data/mc & 1.00 $\pm$ 0.01 & 1.04 $\pm$ 0.01 & 1.06 $\pm$ 0.01 & 1.08 $\pm$ 0.02 & 1.07 $\pm$ 0.02 \\ |
| 460 |
+ |
|
| 461 |
|
\hline |
| 358 |
– |
e + $\geq$2 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 462 |
|
\hline |
| 463 |
< |
data & 0.105 $\pm$ 0.0020 & 0.042 $\pm$ 0.0013 & 0.021 $\pm$ 0.0009 & 0.013 $\pm$ 0.0007 & 0.009 $\pm$ 0.0006 \\ |
| 361 |
< |
mc & 0.109 $\pm$ 0.0011 & 0.043 $\pm$ 0.0007 & 0.021 $\pm$ 0.0005 & 0.013 $\pm$ 0.0004 & 0.009 $\pm$ 0.0003 \\ |
| 362 |
< |
data/mc & 0.96 $\pm$ 0.02 & 0.97 $\pm$ 0.03 & 1.00 $\pm$ 0.05 & 1.01 $\pm$ 0.06 & 0.97 $\pm$ 0.08 \\ |
| 463 |
> |
e + $\geq$2 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 464 |
|
\hline |
| 465 |
+ |
data & 0.117 $\pm$ 0.0012 & 0.050 $\pm$ 0.0008 & 0.026 $\pm$ 0.0006 & 0.017 $\pm$ 0.0005 & 0.012 $\pm$ 0.0004 \\ |
| 466 |
+ |
mc & 0.120 $\pm$ 0.0012 & 0.048 $\pm$ 0.0008 & 0.025 $\pm$ 0.0006 & 0.016 $\pm$ 0.0005 & 0.011 $\pm$ 0.0004 \\ |
| 467 |
+ |
data/mc & 0.97 $\pm$ 0.01 & 1.05 $\pm$ 0.02 & 1.05 $\pm$ 0.03 & 1.07 $\pm$ 0.04 & 1.07 $\pm$ 0.05 \\ |
| 468 |
+ |
|
| 469 |
|
\hline |
| 365 |
– |
$\mu$ + $\geq$2 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 470 |
|
\hline |
| 471 |
< |
data & 0.106 $\pm$ 0.0016 & 0.045 $\pm$ 0.0011 & 0.025 $\pm$ 0.0008 & 0.016 $\pm$ 0.0007 & 0.012 $\pm$ 0.0006 \\ |
| 368 |
< |
mc & 0.108 $\pm$ 0.0009 & 0.044 $\pm$ 0.0006 & 0.024 $\pm$ 0.0004 & 0.016 $\pm$ 0.0004 & 0.011 $\pm$ 0.0003 \\ |
| 369 |
< |
data/mc & 0.98 $\pm$ 0.02 & 1.04 $\pm$ 0.03 & 1.04 $\pm$ 0.04 & 1.04 $\pm$ 0.05 & 1.06 $\pm$ 0.06 \\ |
| 471 |
> |
$\mu$ + $\geq$2 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 472 |
|
\hline |
| 473 |
+ |
data & 0.111 $\pm$ 0.0010 & 0.048 $\pm$ 0.0007 & 0.026 $\pm$ 0.0005 & 0.018 $\pm$ 0.0004 & 0.013 $\pm$ 0.0004 \\ |
| 474 |
+ |
mc & 0.115 $\pm$ 0.0010 & 0.048 $\pm$ 0.0006 & 0.025 $\pm$ 0.0005 & 0.016 $\pm$ 0.0004 & 0.012 $\pm$ 0.0003 \\ |
| 475 |
+ |
data/mc & 0.97 $\pm$ 0.01 & 1.01 $\pm$ 0.02 & 1.04 $\pm$ 0.03 & 1.09 $\pm$ 0.04 & 1.09 $\pm$ 0.04 \\ |
| 476 |
+ |
|
| 477 |
|
\hline |
| 372 |
– |
e + $\geq$3 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 478 |
|
\hline |
| 479 |
< |
data & 0.117 $\pm$ 0.0055 & 0.051 $\pm$ 0.0038 & 0.029 $\pm$ 0.0029 & 0.018 $\pm$ 0.0023 & 0.012 $\pm$ 0.0019 \\ |
| 480 |
< |
mc & 0.120 $\pm$ 0.0031 & 0.052 $\pm$ 0.0021 & 0.027 $\pm$ 0.0015 & 0.018 $\pm$ 0.0012 & 0.013 $\pm$ 0.0011 \\ |
| 481 |
< |
data/mc & 0.97 $\pm$ 0.05 & 0.99 $\pm$ 0.08 & 1.10 $\pm$ 0.13 & 1.03 $\pm$ 0.15 & 0.91 $\pm$ 0.16 \\ |
| 479 |
> |
e + $\geq$3 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 480 |
> |
\hline |
| 481 |
> |
data & 0.123 $\pm$ 0.0031 & 0.058 $\pm$ 0.0022 & 0.034 $\pm$ 0.0017 & 0.023 $\pm$ 0.0014 & 0.017 $\pm$ 0.0012 \\ |
| 482 |
> |
mc & 0.131 $\pm$ 0.0030 & 0.055 $\pm$ 0.0020 & 0.030 $\pm$ 0.0015 & 0.020 $\pm$ 0.0013 & 0.015 $\pm$ 0.0011 \\ |
| 483 |
> |
data/mc & 0.94 $\pm$ 0.03 & 1.06 $\pm$ 0.06 & 1.14 $\pm$ 0.08 & 1.16 $\pm$ 0.10 & 1.17 $\pm$ 0.12 \\ |
| 484 |
> |
|
| 485 |
|
\hline |
| 486 |
|
\hline |
| 487 |
< |
$\mu$ + $\geq$3 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 487 |
> |
$\mu$ + $\geq$3 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 488 |
|
\hline |
| 489 |
< |
data & 0.111 $\pm$ 0.0044 & 0.050 $\pm$ 0.0030 & 0.029 $\pm$ 0.0024 & 0.019 $\pm$ 0.0019 & 0.014 $\pm$ 0.0017 \\ |
| 490 |
< |
mc & 0.115 $\pm$ 0.0025 & 0.051 $\pm$ 0.0017 & 0.030 $\pm$ 0.0013 & 0.020 $\pm$ 0.0011 & 0.015 $\pm$ 0.0009 \\ |
| 491 |
< |
data/mc & 0.97 $\pm$ 0.04 & 0.97 $\pm$ 0.07 & 0.95 $\pm$ 0.09 & 0.97 $\pm$ 0.11 & 0.99 $\pm$ 0.13 \\ |
| 489 |
> |
data & 0.121 $\pm$ 0.0025 & 0.055 $\pm$ 0.0018 & 0.033 $\pm$ 0.0014 & 0.022 $\pm$ 0.0011 & 0.017 $\pm$ 0.0010 \\ |
| 490 |
> |
mc & 0.120 $\pm$ 0.0024 & 0.052 $\pm$ 0.0016 & 0.029 $\pm$ 0.0012 & 0.019 $\pm$ 0.0010 & 0.014 $\pm$ 0.0009 \\ |
| 491 |
> |
data/mc & 1.01 $\pm$ 0.03 & 1.06 $\pm$ 0.05 & 1.14 $\pm$ 0.07 & 1.14 $\pm$ 0.08 & 1.16 $\pm$ 0.10 \\ |
| 492 |
> |
|
| 493 |
|
\hline |
| 494 |
|
\hline |
| 495 |
< |
e + $\geq$4 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 495 |
> |
e + $\geq$4 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 496 |
|
\hline |
| 497 |
< |
data & 0.113 $\pm$ 0.0148 & 0.048 $\pm$ 0.0100 & 0.033 $\pm$ 0.0083 & 0.020 $\pm$ 0.0065 & 0.017 $\pm$ 0.0062 \\ |
| 498 |
< |
mc & 0.146 $\pm$ 0.0092 & 0.064 $\pm$ 0.0064 & 0.034 $\pm$ 0.0048 & 0.024 $\pm$ 0.0040 & 0.021 $\pm$ 0.0037 \\ |
| 499 |
< |
data/mc & 0.78 $\pm$ 0.11 & 0.74 $\pm$ 0.17 & 0.96 $\pm$ 0.28 & 0.82 $\pm$ 0.30 & 0.85 $\pm$ 0.34 \\ |
| 497 |
> |
data & 0.129 $\pm$ 0.0080 & 0.070 $\pm$ 0.0061 & 0.044 $\pm$ 0.0049 & 0.031 $\pm$ 0.0042 & 0.021 $\pm$ 0.0034 \\ |
| 498 |
> |
mc & 0.132 $\pm$ 0.0075 & 0.059 $\pm$ 0.0053 & 0.035 $\pm$ 0.0041 & 0.025 $\pm$ 0.0035 & 0.017 $\pm$ 0.0029 \\ |
| 499 |
> |
data/mc & 0.98 $\pm$ 0.08 & 1.18 $\pm$ 0.15 & 1.26 $\pm$ 0.20 & 1.24 $\pm$ 0.24 & 1.18 $\pm$ 0.28 \\ |
| 500 |
> |
|
| 501 |
|
\hline |
| 502 |
|
\hline |
| 503 |
< |
$\mu$ + $\geq$4 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 503 |
> |
$\mu$ + $\geq$4 jets & $>$ 1 GeV & $>$ 2 GeV & $>$ 3 GeV & $>$ 4 GeV & $>$ 5 GeV \\ |
| 504 |
|
\hline |
| 505 |
< |
data & 0.130 $\pm$ 0.0128 & 0.052 $\pm$ 0.0085 & 0.028 $\pm$ 0.0063 & 0.019 $\pm$ 0.0052 & 0.019 $\pm$ 0.0052 \\ |
| 506 |
< |
mc & 0.105 $\pm$ 0.0064 & 0.045 $\pm$ 0.0043 & 0.027 $\pm$ 0.0034 & 0.019 $\pm$ 0.0028 & 0.014 $\pm$ 0.0024 \\ |
| 507 |
< |
data/mc & 1.23 $\pm$ 0.14 & 1.18 $\pm$ 0.22 & 1.03 $\pm$ 0.27 & 1.01 $\pm$ 0.32 & 1.37 $\pm$ 0.45 \\ |
| 505 |
> |
data & 0.136 $\pm$ 0.0067 & 0.064 $\pm$ 0.0048 & 0.041 $\pm$ 0.0039 & 0.029 $\pm$ 0.0033 & 0.024 $\pm$ 0.0030 \\ |
| 506 |
> |
mc & 0.130 $\pm$ 0.0063 & 0.065 $\pm$ 0.0046 & 0.035 $\pm$ 0.0034 & 0.020 $\pm$ 0.0026 & 0.013 $\pm$ 0.0022 \\ |
| 507 |
> |
data/mc & 1.04 $\pm$ 0.07 & 0.99 $\pm$ 0.10 & 1.19 $\pm$ 0.16 & 1.47 $\pm$ 0.25 & 1.81 $\pm$ 0.37 \\ |
| 508 |
> |
|
| 509 |
|
\hline |
| 510 |
|
\hline |
| 511 |
|
|
| 514 |
|
\end{table} |
| 515 |
|
|
| 516 |
|
|
| 406 |
– |
|
| 517 |
|
%Figure.~\ref{fig:reliso} compares the relative track isolation |
| 518 |
|
%for events with a track with $\pt > 10~\GeV$ in addition to a selected |
| 519 |
|
%muon for $\Z+4$ jet events and various \ttll\ components. The |
| 593 |
|
% \end{center} |
| 594 |
|
%\end{figure} |
| 595 |
|
|
| 596 |
+ |
\subsection{Summary of uncertainties} |
| 597 |
+ |
\label{sec:bgunc-bottomline}. |
| 598 |
+ |
|
| 599 |
+ |
THIS NEEDS TO BE WRITTEN |
