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 1.5 by claudioc, Wed Jun 23 13:16:20 2010 UTC vs.
Revision 1.7 by claudioc, Thu Jul 8 11:37:50 2010 UTC

# Line 113 | 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 150 | Line 196 | as we collect more data.  In any case, t
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.

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines