| 1 |
claudioc |
1.1 |
\section{Trigger efficiency}
|
| 2 |
|
|
\label{sec:trgEff}
|
| 3 |
|
|
|
| 4 |
claudioc |
1.2 |
As described in Section~\ref{sec:trigSel} we rely on a
|
| 5 |
|
|
mixture of single and double lepton triggers. The trigger
|
| 6 |
|
|
efficiency is very high because for most of the phase space
|
| 7 |
|
|
we have two leptons each of which can fire a single lepton
|
| 8 |
|
|
trigger -- and the single lepton triggers are very efficient.
|
| 9 |
|
|
|
| 10 |
|
|
We apply to MC events a simplified model of the trigger efficiency
|
| 11 |
|
|
as a function of dilepton species ($ee$, $e\mu$, $\mu\mu$), the $P_T$
|
| 12 |
|
|
of the individual leptons, and, in the case of muons, the $|\eta|$
|
| 13 |
|
|
of the muons. We believe that this model is adequate for
|
| 14 |
|
|
the trigger efficiency precision needed for this analysis.
|
| 15 |
claudioc |
1.6 |
Details are given in Appendix~\ref{sec:appendix_trigger}.
|
| 16 |
claudioc |
1.3 |
|
| 17 |
|
|
We take the trigger efficiency for $ee$ as 100\%. The trigger efficiency
|
| 18 |
claudioc |
1.5 |
for the $e\mu$ and $\mu\mu$ final states is summarized in
|
| 19 |
|
|
Figures~\ref{fig:emuModel} and~\ref{fig:mumuModel}.
|
| 20 |
claudioc |
1.3 |
We estimate the systematic uncertainties on the trigger modeling
|
| 21 |
benhoob |
1.9 |
to be at the level of 1\%, which is approximately the difference in signal
|
| 22 |
|
|
yields between using 100\% trigger efficiency and the full trigger
|
| 23 |
|
|
efficiency model.
|
