ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | Root Listing
root/cvsroot/UserCode/claudioc/OSNote2010/limit.tex
Revision: 1.8
Committed: Sat Nov 13 17:09:06 2010 UTC (14 years, 5 months ago) by claudioc
Content type: application/x-tex
Branch: MAIN
Changes since 1.7: +31 -6 lines
Log Message:
added response

File Contents

# Content
1 \section{Limit on new physics}
2 \label{sec:limit}
3
4 {\bf \color{red} The numbers in this Section need to be double checked.}
5
6 As discussed in Section~\ref{sec:results}, we see one event
7 in the signal region, defined as SumJetPt$>$300 GeV and
8 \met/$\sqrt{\rm SumJetPt}>8.5$ GeV$^{\frac{1}{2}}$.
9
10 The background prediction from the SM Monte Carlo is
11 1.4 $\pm$ 0.5 events, where the uncertainty comes from
12 the jet energy scale (30\%, see Section~\ref{sec:systematics}),
13 the luminosity (10\%), and the lepton/trigger
14 efficiency (10\%)\footnote{Other uncertainties associated with
15 the modeling of $t\bar{t}$ in MadGraph have not been evaluated.
16 The uncertainty on $pp \to \sigma(t\bar{t}$ is also not included.}.
17 The data driven background predictions from the ABCD method
18 and the $P_T(\ell\ell)$ method are 1.5 $\pm$ 0.9 and
19 $2.5 \pm 2.2$ events, respectively.
20
21 These three predictions are in good agreement with each other
22 and with the observation of one event in the signal region.
23 We calculate a Bayesian 95\% CL upper limit\cite{ref:bayes.f}
24 on the number of non SM events in the signal region to be 4.1.
25 This was calculated using a background prediction of $N_{BG}=1.4 \pm 1.1$
26 events. The upper limit is not very sensitive to the choice of
27 $N_{BG}$ and its uncertainty.
28
29 To get a feeling for the sensitivity of this search to some
30 popular SUSY models, we remind the reader of the number of expected
31 LM0 and LM1 events from Table~\ref{tab:sigcont}: $6.5 \pm 1.3$
32 events and $2.6 \pm 0.4$ respectively, where the uncertainties
33 are from energy scale (Section~\ref{sec:systematics}), luminosity,
34 and lepton efficiency.
35
36 In Figure~\ref{fig:response} we provide the response functions for the
37 SumJetPt and \met/$\sqrt{\rm SumJetPt}$ in MC, as well as the
38 efficiency for the cuts on these quantities used in defining the
39 signal region (SumJetPt $>$ 300 GeV and \met/$\sqrt{\rm SumJetPt} > 8.5$
40 Gev$^{\frac{1}{2}}$). We see that the average SumJetPt response
41 in the Monte Carlo
42 is very close to one, with an RMS of order 10\%. The
43 response of \met/$\sqrt{\rm SumJetPt}$ is approximately 0.94 with an
44 RMS of 15\%.
45
46 Using this information as well as the kinematical
47 cuts described in Section~\ref{sec:eventSel} and the lepton efficiencies
48 of Figures~\ref{fig:effttbar}, one should be able to confront
49 any existing or future model via a relatively simple generator
50 level study by comparing the expected number of events in 35 pb$^{-1}$
51 with our upper limit of 4.1 events.
52
53 \begin{figure}[tbh]
54 \begin{center}
55 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{selectionEff.png}
56 \caption{\label{fig:response} Left plots: the efficiencies
57 as a function of the true quantities for the SumJetPt (top) and
58 tcMET/$\sqrt{\rm SumJetPt}$ (bottom) requirements for the signal
59 region as a function of their true values. The value of the
60 cuts is indicated by the vertical line.
61 Right plots: The average response and its RMS for the SumJetPt
62 (top) and tcMET/$\sqrt{\rm SumJetPt}$ (bottom) measurements.
63 The response is defined as the ratio of the reconstructed quantity
64 to the true quantity in MC. These plots are done using the LM0
65 Monte Carlo, but they are not expected to depend strongly on
66 the underlying physics.}
67 \end{center}
68 \end{figure}