ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | Root Listing
root/cvsroot/UserCode/benhoob/cmsnotes/ZMet2012/systematics.tex
Revision: 1.1
Committed: Tue Feb 5 13:19:47 2013 UTC (12 years, 3 months ago) by benhoob
Content type: application/x-tex
Branch: MAIN
Log Message:
Initial commit

File Contents

# User Rev Content
1 benhoob 1.1 \clearpage
2    
3     \section{Systematic Uncertainties in Signal Acceptance}
4    
5     In this section we discuss systematic uncertainties in the signal acceptance. These efficiency
6     uncertainties are relevant for the interpretations in the \wzmet\ and the GMSB models, which
7     are combined with the results of the trilepton and quadlepton analysis, respectively, in AN-2012/351.
8    
9     \begin{table}[htb]
10     \begin{center}
11     \footnotesize
12     \caption{\label{tab:syst} Summary of uncertainties in the signal efficiency. }
13     \begin{tabular}{l|c|l}
14     \hline
15     \hline
16     Source & Value (\%) & Method \\
17     \hline
18     Luminosity & 4.4 & official CMS value \\
19     Trigger efficiency & 3 & efficiency measurements documented in Sec. 4, Table 9 of AN-2012/248 \\
20     Lepton ID/isolation & 2 (per lepton) & Z tag-and-probe measurements in AN-2012/257 \\
21     B-veto & 6 & dedicated measurement in AN-2012/248 Sec. 7.6 \\
22     Z mass window requirement & 3 & see text and Table~\ref{tab:mllsyst} \\
23     Jet selection, dijet mass, \MET & assessed at each model point & official JetMet POG recipe \\
24     \hline
25     \hline
26     \end{tabular}
27     \end{center}
28     \end{table}
29    
30     A summary of the efficiency uncertainties is presented in Table~\ref{tab:syst}.
31     The CMS uncertainty in the luminosity is 4.4\%. The trigger efficiency is measured in AN-2102/248 with an uncertainty of 3\%.
32     The lepton identification and isolation requirements are measured in data and MC and found to be consistent within 2\%, for
33     the \pt\ $>$ 20 GeV region relevant for this analysis, in AN-2012/257. The impact of the b-veto on the signal acceptance
34     is quantified with a dedicated measurement performed in Sec. 7.6 of AN-2012/248. The uncertainty in the selection of dilepton
35     events satisfying the Z mass window requirement 81--101 GeV is performed as follows. In both data and MC, the Z mass window
36     in the inclusive preselection region (Z and at least 2 jets) is loosened to 60--120 GeV.
37     The efficiency of the events in the loose window to satisfy the analysis dilepton mass selection
38     of 81--101 GeV is compared in data and MC, and found to be consistent within 3\% for both ee and $\mu\mu$ channels
39     (see Table~\ref{tab:mllsyst}), and a corresponding uncertainty on the signal efficiency is assessed.
40    
41     The above uncertainties are the same for all SUSY model points. However the impact of the jet energy scale uncertainty, which
42     affects the selection efficiencies for all jets and \MET\ objects, varies significantly across the model parameter space and
43     is assessed separately at each point. The official JetMet POG recipe is used for this purpose. Each jet is assigned an uncertainty
44     based on its \pt\ and $\eta$. The jet energy is varied by this uncertainty, which is propagated to the efficiencies for the jet selection,
45     dijet mass selection and \MET\ selection. In addition, for the \MET, a 10\% uncertainty on the unclustered energy is included.
46     The \MET\ variation alters the shape of the signal \MET\ distribution and causes a bin-to-bin migration of events, which is
47     included in the limit setting procedure performed with LandS.
48    
49     \begin{table}[htb]
50     \begin{center}
51     \footnotesize
52     \caption{\label{tab:mllsyst} Summary of the dilepton mass selection efficiency uncertainties. Loose and tight refer to dilepton
53     mass windows of 60--120 GeV and 81-101 GeV, respectively.}
54     \begin{tabular}{l|c|c}
55     \hline
56     \hline
57     & ee & $\mu\mu$ \\
58     \hline
59     MC loose & 200694.0 & 285462.5 \\
60     MC tight & 183326.2 & 260960.0 \\
61     MC tight/loose & 0.913 $\pm$ 0.005 & 0.914 $\pm$ 0.004 \\
62     \hline
63     data loose & 209540 & 263747 \\
64     data tight & 185555 & 234132 \\
65     data tight/loose & 0.886 $\pm$ 0.003 & 0.888 $\pm$ 0.003 \\
66     \hline
67     \hline
68     \end{tabular}
69     \end{center}
70     \end{table}