ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | Root Listing
root/cvsroot/UserCode/claudioc/dilNoteICHEP/fakerate.tex
(Generate patch)

Comparing UserCode/claudioc/dilNoteICHEP/fakerate.tex (file contents):
Revision 1.3 by claudioc, Thu Jun 10 08:24:56 2010 UTC vs.
Revision 1.7 by claudioc, Thu Jul 8 11:37:50 2010 UTC

# Line 22 | Line 22 | for the lepton selection.  Dilepton back
22   with one real lepton and one fake lepton are estimated by
23   selecting one lepton passing the full lepton selection
24   and one failing it but passing the FO selection.
25 < Backgrounds with two fake leptons are estimated by requiring
25 > Backgrounds with two fake leptons (QCD) are estimated by requiring
26   both lepton candidates to pass the FO selection and fail
27   the full selection.
28 < \item Each event is weighted by FR/(1-FR), where FR is the Fake
29 < Rate for the FO in the event.  In case of two FO, we take the
30 < weight as the product of the two FR/(1-FR) for the two FO.
28 > \item For the QCD backgrounds considered in this note,
29 > each event is weighted by the product of the two factors
30 > of FR/(1-FR), where FR is the Fake
31 > Rate for each of the two FO.  
32   \item The sum of the weights over the selected events is the
33   background prediction.
34   \end{itemize}
# Line 112 | Line 113 | be estimated.
113   The FR are measured as a function of $P_T$ and $|\eta|$.
114   The FR projections on the $P_T$ and $|\eta|$ axes for the muon FR and for
115   the three (V1, V2, V3) electron FR in the different trigger samples
116 < are displayed in Figures~\ref{fig:muFR} and~\ref{fig:eleFR}.
116 > are displayed in
117 > {\color{red} Figures~\ref{fig:muFR} and~\ref{fig:eleFR} (old)} and
118 > {\color{blue}Figures~\ref{fig:muFR2} and~\ref{fig:eleFR2} (new)}.
119 >
120  
121  
122   \begin{figure}[htb]
123   \begin{center}
124 + {\color{red}
125   \includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{MuFakeRatesJune1.pdf}
126   \includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{muFReta.pdf}
127   \caption{\label{fig:muFR}The muon fake rate as a function of $P_T$
128 < and $|\eta|$ in the different jet samples.}
128 > and $|\eta|$ in the different jet samples. (Old plots updated below).}
129 > }
130 > \end{center}
131 > \end{figure}
132 >
133 >
134 >
135 > \begin{figure}[htb]
136 > \begin{center}
137 > {\color{blue}
138 > \includegraphics[width=0.31\linewidth, angle=90]{MuFakeRatesJuly7.pdf}
139 > \includegraphics[width=0.31\linewidth, angle=90]{muFReta7July.pdf}
140 > \caption{\label{fig:muFR2}The muon fake rate as a function of $P_T$
141 > and $|\eta|$ in the different jet samples.  Note that these now start at
142 > $P_T=$ 10 GeV instead of $P_T=$5 GeV as they did in the earlier analysis
143 > because of a preselection aplied in our data handling.  For this reason
144 > the $\eta$-projections cannot be directly compared since the this is
145 > dominated by muons of $P_T$ near threshold.  Note also that the
146 > muon identification requirements have changed a little bit, as
147 > described in Section 3.1.5. (New updated plots).}
148 > }
149   \end{center}
150   \end{figure}
151  
152 +
153 +
154   \begin{figure}[htb]
155   \begin{center}
156 + {\color{red}
157   \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{ElFakeRatesJune1.pdf}
158   \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{eFReta.pdf}
159   \caption{\label{fig:eleFR}The electron fake rates
160   (V1,V2,V3) as a function of $P_T$ and $|\eta|$
161 < in the different jet samples.}
161 > in the different jet samples. (Old plots updated below).}
162 > }
163 > \end{center}
164 > \end{figure}
165 >
166 >
167 >
168 > \begin{figure}[htb]
169 > \begin{center}
170 > {\color{blue}
171 > \includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth,angle=90 ]{ElFakeRatesJuly7.pdf}
172 > \includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth,angle=90]{eFRetaJuly7.pdf}
173 > \caption{\label{fig:eleFR2}The electron fake rates
174 > (V1,V2,V3) as a function of $P_T$ and $|\eta|$
175 > in the different jet samples.
176 > Note that the spike removal has been added to the electron
177 > selection since the earlier analysis.  This is a very
178 > small effect. (New updated plots).}
179 > }
180   \end{center}
181   \end{figure}
182  
183 +
184   The fake rates are reasonably stable with respect to
185   jet trigger variations, within the $\approx 50\%$ which
186   we believe to be a realistic goal for the FR systematics.  
# Line 148 | Line 195 | is quite coarse, because of the lack of
195   as we collect more data.  In any case, the
196   FR does not appear to change very fast as a function of $P_T$.
197  
198 +
199 + \clearpage
200 +
201 + \subsection{Loosening the isolation requirement for the muon FO}
202 + Loosening the isolation requirement for the muon FO would reduce the
203 + muon FR.  This is in general ``a good thing''\texttrademark.
204 + However, the price one then pays is that the jet dependence of the
205 + FR increases.  This is illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:FRlooseIso}.
206 +
207 + In the $P_T \approx 8$ GeV bin, the ratio of FR in the two extreme triggers
208 + (HLT\_L1Jet6U and HLT\_Jet30U) increases from 1.6 (FO-Iso $<$ 0.4) to 2.0
209 + (FO-Iso $<$ 0.6) to 2.4 (FO-Iso $<$ 0.8) to 2.9 (FO-Iso $<$ 1.0). Given this
210 + behavior, for now we keep the FO isolation requirement to 0.4.
211 +
212 + \begin{figure}[htb]
213 + \begin{center}
214 + \includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth,angle=90]{muonFR_differentIso.pdf}
215 + \caption{\label{fig:FRlooseIso}Muon FR as a function of $P_T$ in different
216 + trigger samples for different choices of the maximum isolation
217 + requirement on the muon FO (0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0).}
218 + \end{center}
219 + \end{figure}
220 +
221 +
222   \subsection{Bias due to lepton triggers?}
223   Another possible bias is related to the fact that events used to
224   measure the FR are collected with jet triggers.  On the other hand
# Line 191 | Line 262 | HLT\_Photon10\_L1R trigger.}
262   The statistics are not very good, but the lepton trigger bias
263   does not seem to be a significant effect.  We tentatively neglect it.
264  
265 + \clearpage

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines