| 1 |
|
\section{Event Preselection} |
| 2 |
|
\label{sec:eventSel} |
| 3 |
< |
%{\color{red} This needs to be fixed up -- probably many mistakes present.}\\ |
| 4 |
< |
As mentioned in the introduction, the preselection is based on the |
| 5 |
< |
$t\bar{t}$ analysis. We select events with two opposite sign isolated |
| 3 |
> |
The purpose of the preselection is to define a data sample rich |
| 4 |
> |
in $t\bar{t} \to$ dileptons. We compare the kinematical |
| 5 |
> |
properties of this sample with expectations from $t\bar{t}$ |
| 6 |
> |
Monte Carlo. |
| 7 |
> |
|
| 8 |
> |
The preselection is based on the |
| 9 |
> |
$t\bar{t}$ analysis~\cite{ref:top}. |
| 10 |
> |
We select events with two opposite sign, well-identified and isolated |
| 11 |
|
leptons ($ee$, $e\mu$, or $\mu\mu$); one of the leptons must |
| 12 |
|
have $P_T > 20$ GeV, |
| 13 |
< |
the other one must have $P_T > 10$ GeV\footnote{In case of events with |
| 13 |
> |
the other one must have $P_T > 10$ GeV. Events with dilepton mass |
| 14 |
> |
consistent with $Z \to ee/\mu\mu$ are rejected. |
| 15 |
> |
In case of events with |
| 16 |
|
more than two such leptons, we select the pair that maximizes the scalar |
| 17 |
< |
sum of lepton $P_T$'s.}; |
| 18 |
< |
there must be two JPT |
| 17 |
> |
sum of lepton $P_T$'s. |
| 18 |
> |
There must be two JPT |
| 19 |
|
jets of $P_T > 30$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$; the scalar sum of the |
| 20 |
|
$P_T$ of all such jets must exceed 100 GeV; jets must pass |
| 21 |
< |
{\tt caloJetId} and be separated by $\Delta R >$ 0.4 from the |
| 22 |
< |
any lepton passing the selection described below. |
| 23 |
< |
{\color{red}The 11 pb iteration only does this for the two selected |
| 17 |
< |
leptons.} |
| 18 |
< |
Finally $\met > 50$ GeV |
| 19 |
< |
(we use tcMet). More details are given in the subsections below. |
| 21 |
> |
{\tt caloJetId} and be separated by $\Delta R >$ 0.4 from any |
| 22 |
> |
lepton passing the selection. |
| 23 |
> |
Finally $\met > 50$ GeV (we use tcMet). More details are given in the subsections below. |
| 24 |
|
|
| 25 |
|
\subsection{Event Cleanup} |
| 26 |
|
\label{sec:cleanup} |
| 62 |
|
\item At least one of the hits from the |
| 63 |
|
standalone muon must be used in the global fit. |
| 64 |
|
|
| 65 |
< |
%\item Require tracker $\Delta P_T/P_T < 0.1$. This cut was not in the original top analysis. |
| 66 |
< |
%It is motivated by the observation of |
| 67 |
< |
%poorly measured muons in data with large |
| 68 |
< |
%relative $P_T$ uncertainty, giving significant contributions to the \met. |
| 65 |
> |
\item Require tracker $\Delta P_T/P_T < 0.1$. This cut was not in the original top analysis. |
| 66 |
> |
It is motivated by the observation of |
| 67 |
> |
poorly measured muons in data with large |
| 68 |
> |
relative $P_T$ uncertainty, giving significant contributions to the \met. |
| 69 |
|
%{\color{red} This is not applied to the 11 pb iteration.} |
| 70 |
|
|
| 71 |
|
|
| 81 |
|
|
| 82 |
|
\begin{itemize} |
| 83 |
|
|
| 84 |
< |
\item $P_T > 10$ GeV. (The $t\bar{t}$ analysis uses 20 GeV but for |
| 85 |
< |
completeness we calculate FR down to 10 GeV). |
| 84 |
> |
% \item $P_T > 10$ GeV. (The $t\bar{t}$ analysis uses 20 GeV but for |
| 85 |
> |
% completeness we calculate FR down to 10 GeV). |
| 86 |
|
|
| 87 |
|
\item $|\eta| < 2.5$. |
| 88 |
|
|
| 122 |
|
|
| 123 |
|
We remove $e^+e^-$ and $\mu^+ \mu^-$ events with invariant |
| 124 |
|
mass between 76 and 106 GeV. We also remove events |
| 125 |
< |
with invariant mass $<$ 10 GeV. |
| 125 |
> |
with invariant mass $<$ 10 GeV, since this kinematical region is |
| 126 |
> |
not well reprodced in CMS Monte Carlos. |
| 127 |
> |
|
| 128 |
> |
In addition, we remove $Z \to \mu\mu\gamma$ |
| 129 |
> |
candidates with the $\gamma$ collinear with one of the muons. This is |
| 130 |
> |
done as follows: |
| 131 |
> |
if the ecal energy associated with one of the muons is greater than 6 GeV, |
| 132 |
> |
we add this energy to the momentum of the initial muon, and we recompute |
| 133 |
> |
the $\mu\mu$ mass. If this mass is between 76 and 106 GeV, the event is rejected. |
| 134 |
> |
|
| 135 |
|
|
| 136 |
|
\subsection{Trigger Selection} |
| 137 |
|
\label{sec:trigSel} |
| 138 |
|
|
| 139 |
|
Because most of the triggers implemented in the 2nd half of the |
| 140 |
< |
2010 run were not implemented in the Monte Carlo, no trigger |
| 141 |
< |
selection is applied on Monte Carlo data. As discussed in |
| 140 |
> |
2010 run were not implemented in the Monte Carlo, |
| 141 |
> |
we do not make any requirements on HLT bits in the Monte Carlo. |
| 142 |
> |
Instead, as discussed in |
| 143 |
|
Section~\ref{sec:trgEff}, a trigger efficiency weight is applied |
| 144 |
|
to each event, based on the trigger efficiencies measured on data. |
| 145 |
|
Trigger efficiency weights are very close to 1. |
| 160 |
|
% We currently |
| 161 |
|
% do not require MC events to pass any triggers. |
| 162 |
|
|
| 163 |
+ |
|
| 164 |
+ |
|
| 165 |
+ |
|
| 166 |
+ |
|
| 167 |
+ |
|
| 168 |
+ |
|
| 169 |
+ |
|
| 170 |
+ |
|
| 171 |
|
\begin{itemize} |
| 172 |
|
\item single-muon triggers |
| 173 |
|
\begin{itemize} |
