| 195 |
|
the boundaries using the method recommended by the SUSY |
| 196 |
|
group\cite{ref:smooth}. In addition, we show a limit |
| 197 |
|
curve based on the LO cross-section, as well as the |
| 198 |
< |
``expected'' limit curve. The expected limit curve is |
| 198 |
> |
``expected'' limit curve. The expected limit curve was |
| 199 |
|
calculated using the CLA function also available in cl95cms. |
| 200 |
< |
Cross-section uncertainties due to variations of the factorization |
| 200 |
> |
In general we found that the ``expected'' limit is very close |
| 201 |
> |
to the observed limit, which is not surprising since the |
| 202 |
> |
expected BG (1.4 $\pm$ 0.8 events) is fully consistent |
| 203 |
> |
with the observation (1 event). Because of the quantization, |
| 204 |
> |
we find that the expected and observed limits are either |
| 205 |
> |
identical or differ by one or at most two grid points. |
| 206 |
> |
We have approximated the expected limit as the observed limit |
| 207 |
> |
minus 10 GeV\footnote{We show the expected limit only because |
| 208 |
> |
this is what is recommended by SUSY management. We believe that |
| 209 |
> |
quoting the agreement between the expected BG and the |
| 210 |
> |
observation should be enough....}. |
| 211 |
> |
Finally, we note that the sross-section uncertainties due to |
| 212 |
> |
variations of the factorization |
| 213 |
|
and renormalization scale are not included for the LO curve. |
| 214 |
|
The results are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:msugra} |
| 215 |
|
|
| 250 |
|
we use the lognormal nuisance parameter model as the default. |
| 251 |
|
|
| 252 |
|
|
| 253 |
< |
\clearpage |
| 253 |
> |
% \clearpage |
| 254 |
|
|
| 255 |
|
|
| 256 |
|
\subsubsection{Effect of signal contamination} |
