Fermilab, June 26 th 2001 Thoughts on the fitting procedure for the  c + lifetime with the        channel Gianluigi Boca.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Hypothesis Testing. To define a statistical Test we 1.Choose a statistic (called the test statistic) 2.Divide the range of possible values for the test.
Advertisements

Brief introduction on Logistic Regression
Update on a 0 (980) P.Gauzzi. 2 Main problem From event counting: Br(  0  ) = (6.70  0.26)  with  Br(  0  ) = (7.22  0.52)  10.
Mean, Proportion, CLT Bootstrap
Effect of b-tagging Scale Factors on M bb invariant mass distribution Ricardo Gonçalo.
TRACK DICTIONARY (UPDATE) RESOLUTION, EFFICIENCY AND L – R AMBIGUITY SOLUTION Claudio Chiri MEG meeting, 21 Jan 2004.
6.5: Estimating a Population Proportion
R Measurement at charm resonant region Haiming HU BES Collaboration Charm 2007 Cornell University Ithaca, NY. US.
Basic Business Statistics, 10e © 2006 Prentice-Hall, Inc. Chap 8-1 Chapter 8 Confidence Interval Estimation Basic Business Statistics 10 th Edition.
Pinning down the J PC values of the X(3872) K. Miyabayashi for S.K. Choi & S.L. Olsen Feb, 2005 Belle Analysis & Software Meeting.
Chap 9-1 Statistics for Business and Economics, 6e © 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. Chapter 9 Estimation: Additional Topics Statistics for Business and Economics.
8-1 Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall Chapter 8 Confidence Interval Estimation Statistics for Managers using Microsoft.
Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 8-1 Chapter 8 Confidence Interval Estimation Statistics for Managers using Microsoft Excel 6 th Global Edition.
8-2 Basics of Hypothesis Testing
Statistics for Managers Using Microsoft Excel, 5e © 2008 Pearson Prentice-Hall, Inc.Chap 8-1 Statistics for Managers Using Microsoft® Excel 5th Edition.
Analysis work by: Rachid Ayad Sheldon Stone Jianchun Wang CBX note available: /homes/cleo/sls/ds4pi.ps Status of B  D  (4  )   analysis Jianchun.
Statistics for Managers Using Microsoft Excel, 4e © 2004 Prentice-Hall, Inc. Chap 7-1 Chapter 7 Confidence Interval Estimation Statistics for Managers.
INFERENTIAL STATISTICS – Samples are only estimates of the population – Sample statistics will be slightly off from the true values of its population’s.
Outline: (1) The data sample (2) Some news on the analysis method (3) Efficiency revised (4) Background revised (5) Data: spectrum + “phi-curve”
Basic Business Statistics, 11e © 2009 Prentice-Hall, Inc. Chap 8-1 Chapter 8 Confidence Interval Estimation Basic Business Statistics 11 th Edition.
Confidence Interval Estimation
W  eν The W->eν analysis is a phi uniformity calibration, and only yields relative calibration constants. This means that all of the α’s in a given eta.
 Candidate events are selected by reconstructing a D, called a tag, in several hadronic modes  Then we reconstruct the semileptonic decay in the system.
Testing Models on Simulated Data Presented at the Casualty Loss Reserve Seminar September 19, 2008 Glenn Meyers, FCAS, PhD ISO Innovative Analytics.
A statistical test for point source searches - Aart Heijboer - AWG - Cern june 2002 A statistical test for point source searches Aart Heijboer contents:
K charged meeting 10/11/03 K tracking efficiency & geometrical acceptance :  K (p K,  K )  We use the tag in the handle emisphere to have in the signal.
Statistical Process Control04/03/961 What is Variation? Less Variation = Higher Quality.
Robust Estimators.
On Predictive Modeling for Claim Severity Paper in Spring 2005 CAS Forum Glenn Meyers ISO Innovative Analytics Predictive Modeling Seminar September 19,
Chap 8-1 Chapter 8 Confidence Interval Estimation Statistics for Managers Using Microsoft Excel 7 th Edition, Global Edition Copyright ©2014 Pearson Education.
Ciro Bigongiari, Salvatore Mangano Results of the optical properties of sea water with the OB system.
Optimization of  exclusion cut for the  + and  (1520) analysis Takashi Nakano Based on Draft version of Technical Note 42.
Paper on J/  and b production Wenbin Qian, Patrick Robbe for the F-WG, Tsinghua Beijing/LAL Orsay, 2 Dec 2009.
Preliminary results for the BR(K S  M. Martini and S. Miscetti.
Statistics for Managers Using Microsoft Excel, 5e © 2008 Pearson Prentice-Hall, Inc.Chap 8-1 Statistics for Managers Using Microsoft® Excel 5th Edition.
On quasi-two-body components of (for 250fb -1 ) (for 250fb -1 ) J.Brodzicka, H.Palka INP Krakow DC Meeting May 16, 2005 B +  D 0 D 0 K + B +  D 0 D 0.
1 Marek Szczekowski, Artur Ukleja Warsaw Group 3 June 2015 Model-independent search for CPV in three-bodies charm baryon decays Outline Selections for.
Beam Extrapolation Fit Peter Litchfield  An update on the method I described at the September meeting  Objective;  To fit all data, nc and cc combined,
1 Warsaw Group May 2015 Search for CPV in three-bodies charm baryon decays Outline Selections Mass distributions and reconstructed numbers of candidates.
Diphoton + MET Analysis Update Bruce Schumm UC Santa Cruz / SCIPP 03 July 2013 Editorial Board Meeting.
04/06/07I.Larin pi0 systematic error 1  0 error budget Completed items (review) Updated and new items (not reported yet) Items to be completed.
Hypothesis Testing  Test for one and two means  Test for one and two proportions.
Update on Diffractive Dijets Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham 12/07/2013.
06/2006I.Larin PrimEx Collaboration meeting  0 analysis.
Kalanand Mishra June 29, Branching Ratio Measurements of Decays D 0  π - π + π 0, D 0  K - K + π 0 Relative to D 0  K - π + π 0 Giampiero Mancinelli,
Chapter 9: Introduction to the t statistic. The t Statistic The t statistic allows researchers to use sample data to test hypotheses about an unknown.
Ciro Bigongiari, Salvatore Mangano, Results of the optical properties of sea water with the OB system.
Hypothesis Tests. An Hypothesis is a guess about a situation that can be tested, and the test outcome can be either true or false. –The Null Hypothesis.
Basic Business Statistics, 11e © 2009 Prentice-Hall, Inc. Chap 8-1 Chapter 8 Confidence Interval Estimation Business Statistics: A First Course 5 th Edition.
Bc → J/   Lifetime measurement Use 6.7 fb -1 and try two independent approaches Selection 1: no dependence of selection on decay time Fit fixes bkgd.
Paolo Massarotti Kaon meeting March 2007  ±  X    X  Time measurement use neutral vertex only in order to obtain a completely independent.
M. Martemianov, ITEP, October 2003 Analysis of ratio BR(K     0 )/BR(K    ) M. Martemianov V. Kulikov Motivation Selection and cuts Trigger efficiency.
1 D *+ production Alexandr Kozlinskiy Thomas Bauer Vanya Belyaev
Extrapolation Techniques  Four different techniques have been used to extrapolate near detector data to the far detector to predict the neutrino energy.
I'm concerned that the OS requirement for the signal is inefficient as the charge of the TeV scale leptons can be easily mis-assigned. As a result we do.
LNF 12/12/06 1 F.Ambrosino-T. Capussela-F.Perfetto Update on        Dalitz plot slope Where we started from A big surprise Systematic checks.
R. Kass/Sp07P416/Lecture 71 More on Least Squares Fit (LSQF) In Lec 5, we discussed how we can fit our data points to a linear function (straight line)
Status of the measurement of K L lifetime - Data sample (old): ~ 440 pb -1 ( ) - MC sample: ~125 pb -1 ( mk0 stream ) Selection: standard tag (|
23 Jan 2012 Background shape estimates using sidebands Paul Dauncey G. Davies, D. Futyan, J. Hays, M. Jarvis, M. Kenzie, C. Seez, J. Virdee, N. Wardle.
Referee Report on Open charm production results for summer conferences, 2010 Peter Clarke Marcel Merk “Observations” and “Comments” The referees thank.
Chapter 7 Confidence Interval Estimation
Status report on   f0  00
Observation of a “cusp” in the decay K±  p±pp
Two Interpretations of What it Means to Normalize the Low Energy Monte Carlo Events to the Low Energy Data Atms MC Atms MC Data Data Signal Signal Apply.
Observation of Diffractively Produced W- and Z-Bosons
° status report analysis details: overview; “where we are”; plans: before finalizing result.. I.Larin 02/13/2009.
Studies of EPR-type flavor entangled states in Y(4s)->B0B0
Observation of Diffractively Produced W- and Z-Bosons
Comparing Data and MC CITADL Variables on Ks and KK
° status report analysis details: overview; “where we are”; plans: before finalizing result.. I.Larin 02/13/2009.
Presentation transcript:

Fermilab, June 26 th 2001 Thoughts on the fitting procedure for the  c + lifetime with the        channel Gianluigi Boca

Outline Explanation of the fitting procedure Some check s to show it works Try to answer to the 3 major issues of the lifetime Committee Discussion about Eduardo’s method of treating the double solutions

Peculiarity of the       channel : existence of two solutions for the kink (   ) Selection cuts     linked, at least 3 chmbrs, no  no REME L/  > 7 Primary in target region and Z  c < 2.3 ISO2<  t < 70 fs For the : Wobs(K) < Wobs  –2 For the    n   channel only : from kink not belenging to a Vee with < M(K)<0.515 For the    p  0 channel only : proton from not linked and Wobs(p)<Wobs  – 5 Double solution treatment Two solutions for the kink  two  c + effective mass ( = m1, m2) If two solutions survive the physics cuts accept them both with weight 1 unless  m) = | m1 – m2 | < 30 MeV in which case accept them both with weight 0.5

Peculiarity of the       channel … cntd Long tails of  c + signal, due to kink double solutions, ‘contaminate’ the sidebands. Extraction of background reduced proper time (t’) plot, used for lifetime fit, from Sidebands, is slightly trickier than usual MC plots from 6,000,000    n   and 6,000,000    p  0 events

Two approaches to solve the problem a) Modify the fitting procedure such that it can work with any double solution treatment (my method) b) try to eliminate tails in sidebands by proper choices of one of the two double solutions (Eduardo’s method)

Description of my method Based on two assumptions 1)MC reproduces correctly mass shape and t’ evolution of  c events 2)The t’ evolution of  c signal in the sideband region is the same as the one in the peak region and it is proportional to

Description of my method, contd Combined fit of a)Diplot of the t’ vs       mass  in peak region (from to 2.485) b)       mass  in the OUTER region Peak region Each bin content is predicted Each mass bin content in the outer region is predicted Outer region

Likelihood function

Likelihood, cntd Outer region mass plot predicted entries g(i) taken from MC and normalized A, C 0, C 1 = fit parameters m i = mass in the center of i th bin =+

Diplot t’ vs mass in peak region predicted entries =Ag(j)  +(C 0 +C 1 )  BkBk =+  )

Extraction of the B k from sidebands Sidebands definition : from 2.39 to 2.44 and from 2.49 to (1-Y)  = Y  BkBk

Checking the method with  c  c +   + (p  0 )  +   sample (courtesy of Cristina) Selections No stubs l/ > 5 CLD > 0.03 Picon > 6 p from kink not lnkd  ps    dof  PDG average =  ps

Results for the  c +        all the sample  ps    dof 

A consistency check :  c + lifetime varying the doubles weighting scheme Standard : if two solutions survive the physics cuts accept them both with weight 1 Unless  m) = | m1 – m2 | < 30 MeV in which case accept them both with weight 0.5 Variation 1 : if two solutions survive the discard the event Variation 2 : if two solutions survive accept both with w =1 Variation 3 : if two solutions survive accept both with w = 0.5 Variation 4 : if two solutions survive accept only solution 1 Variation 5 : if two solutions survive accept only solution 2 Variation 6 (the mad man’s scheme) : if two solutions survive accept only solution 2 with w=5. Variation 7 (similar to Eduardo’s scheme) : if two solutions survive accept solution 1 if solution 2 is not in the 2.45 – 2.5 range, else discard the event

A consistency check :  c + lifetime varying the doubles weighting scheme, cntd Method is robust against different doubles treatment

The  c + lifetime Committee 3 major issues on this fitting method 1)“Is it true the  c + signal present in the sideband region have the same t’ distribution as the  c + signal in the peak ?”  LOOK AT THE MC, ALL SAMPLE ratio

3 major issues, cntd 2) “Is it true that B (t’ k ) is independent of mass and the values of A, C 0, C 1 are independent on t’ k ?” IN OTHER WORDS : IS TRUE ? Yes, B (t’ k ) is independent of mass since it is extracted from sidebands and in all E687-E831 lifetime analysis we always have assumed that the sidebands represent well the background under the peak region (if no nasty reflections are present like in the D0 case). If it represents the bckgrnd under the peak, there are no reasons to doubt that it represent the bckgrnd also in any particular mass bin of the mass region!

3 major issues, cntd 3) “Can the  c +       and  c +        samples be merged in one lifetime fit ?“ Yes, just multiply the likelihood for the two samples together and make A fit with 8 parameters ( , the 4 parameters for the backgrounds of the  c +       channel (type1, type2, kink, MultiVee) and A, C0, C1 for the  c +        channel.

Eduardo’s method Reduces long tails in sidebands caused by ‘wrong’ kink solution His double treatment (I hope this summary is accurate) : apply all the physics cuts and, for the events with both solutions surviving the cuts if (  m < 30 MeV ) then choose solution 1 else if ( m 2 NOT in the 2.45 to 2.5 range ) then choose solution 1 else discard the event end if

Eduardo’s method, cntd works well with kink4 signal shape, but … MC, kink2, doubles selected solution MC, kink4, doubles selected solution

… but, I have 2 questions Consider the background (non  c + events) having both solutions passing the physical cuts Toy model montecarlo, 10,000,000 entries and apply Eduardo’s algorithm artificial bump created  in lifetime analysis one needs to determine the amount of background actually present under the peak 1)

The artificial peak stems from the  m < 30 MeV case. One can remove it and use condition : if ( NOT 2.45< m 2 < 2.5 ) then choose solution 1 else discard the event Price to pay :some loss of  c + events beforeafter

Second question : What about the events for which only one solution passed the physical cuts ? Option 1 : ACCEPT IT Option 2 : REMEMBER (or recalculate) OTHER SOLUTION AND APPLY AGAIN EDUARDO’S CRITERION Advantages : for the kink4 fixes the tail problem Disadvantages : a) loose more statistics b) discarded solutions reenters from backdoor after being discarded previously by physical cuts 2) Tails remain !

Conclusions I demonstrated (I hope) my fitting method works with any kind of double soulution scheme for the kink I addressed the three issues of the Committee of the lifetime paper I think it is the preferable method to be usde in the  c + lifetime calculation for       channel