Nubar-PID Nubar-PID distribution for data and MC after: 1) fiducial 2) track quality 3) fit significance data MC data/MC Horn-off.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

% eff = (Wout / W in) *100 eff = (80 J / 100 J) * 100 = 80% W in = 75 N * 5 m = 375 J W out = 100 N * 3 m = 300 J eff = (300 J / 375 J) *100 = 80% W in.

Advertisements

1 LEPS IRS3B analysis Summary JETER HALL PNNL. PNNL Ntuple Status is the latest production tag Includes: LEPS tree (copied from UH ntuples) Matching.

Measurement of the absolute BR(K  +  -  + ) : an update Patrizia de Simone KLOE Kaon meeting – 21 May 2009.

1 A preliminary estimate of the beam e ’s from antineutrinos David Jaffe, Pedro Ochoa December 7 th 2006.

Off-axis Simulations Peter Litchfield, Minnesota  What has been simulated?  Will the experiment work?  Can we choose a technology based on simulations?

Beam e background with antineutrinos Lots of discussion recently; does not look like getting needed amount of pME running will happen (or not easily at.

Selection: i) Used “basic cuts” described in my NuBarPID talk (slide 3). 74.4% of CC events pass this cut. ii) Used David’s PID cut at -0.2 to remove NC.

Summary of Results data-Fit/Scaled MC, E < E cut (candidates for  + decay) data-Fit/Scaled MC, E > E cut raw MC375.8±15.1(stat)79.5±9.2(stat) reweighed.

Update on NC/CC separation At the previous phone meeting I presented a method to separate NC/CC using simple cuts on reconstructed quantities available.

 K K L  +.  + component, ME  + component, LE Difference.

(q/p) / (σ q/p) 0 < Planes < 3030

1 Scaling methods Main idea of scaling methods is: Overall method: C(E) is obtained in 5 different ways: From horn-off data, E cut < E < E high From horn-off.

Search for B     with SemiExclusive reconstruction C.Cartaro, G. De Nardo, F. Fabozzi, L. Lista Università & INFN - Sezione di Napoli.

Update on Secondaries and Backtracking Validation Bruce Schumm UC Santa Cruz February 22, 2008 Inner Detector Software Meeting.

25 April Antineutrino selection for constraining the e beam Goal: extract component of  rate from  + decays Requirement: High purity at low neutrino.

1) Horn-on selection (L010185) Tightening the NuBarPID cut NuBarPID Purity vs. Efficiency nu nubar.

April 1, Beam measurement with -Update - David Jaffe & Pedro Ochoa 1)Reminder of proposed technique 2)Use of horn-off data 3)Use of horn2-off data?

Effective Depletion Depth JC & Marina. 04/30/01Jianchun (JC) Wang2 Depletion Depth Methods FPIX0 pstop at 30° X inc Depth: d  XiXi.

Minimum bias vertex distribution for 1998/99 e - p data and reweighting routine é Measuring the minimum bias vertex distribution. Ricardo Gonçalo, 21/3/2000.

Some D0 Meeting December 2003 Muon Isolation Update Ken Johns University of Arizona.

First tried to reproduce Jeff’s cuts described in his talk at Oxford (minos-doc 1409): For this, used tracks in fiducial volume (1m

1 Beam e ’s from antineutrinos – Update – David Jaffe, Pedro Ochoa November 13 th 2006  Part 1: from  + reweighing  Part 2: New ideas.

Probability Density Function Concept Figure 7.8 Consider a signal that varies in time. What is the probability that the signal at a future time will reside.

Analysis Meeting vol Shun University.

Answers to Xugf’s questions  cj ->  KK  Liang Yan

Outline: (1) The data sample (2) Some news on the analysis method (3) Efficiency revised (4) Background revised (5) Data: spectrum + “phi-curve”

1 Cosmic Muon Analysis: Current Status Stuart Mufson, Brian Rebel Argonne March 18, 2005.

E. De LuciaNeutral and Charged Kaon Meeting – 7 May 2007 Updates on BR(K +  π + π 0 ) E. De Lucia.

1 Calice UK Meeting 27/03/07David Ward Plans; timescales for having analysis results for LCWS Status of current MC/data reconstruction Reconstruction status;

V.Patera – KLOE GM – Otranto – 10 June 2002 K  reconstruction status K + K - retracking features New vs Old : resolution New vs Old : efficiencies Conclusion.

1 The BaBar EMC, and B  J/  hh analysis Nick Barlow, Yaw Ming Chia January 2006.

First Look at Data and MC Comparisons for Cedar and Birch ● Comparisons of physics quantities for CC events with permutations of Cedar, Birch, Data and.

Optimization of  exclusion cut for the  + and  (1520) analysis Takashi Nakano Based on Draft version of Technical Note 42.

Cedar and pre-Daikon Validation ● CC PID parameter based CC sample selections with Birch, Cedar, Carrot and pre-Daikon. ● Cedar validation for use with.

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,

Mark Dorman UCL/RAL MINOS Collaboration Meeting Fermilab, Oct. 05 Data/MC Comparisons and Estimating the ND Flux with QE Events ● Update on QE event selection.

Study of the ND Data/MC for the CC analysis October 14, 2005 MINOS collaboration meeting M.Ishitsuka Indiana University.

T2K muon measurement 2014 Momentum module A.Ariga, C. Pistillo University of Bern S. Aoki Kobe University 1.

1 Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Chapter 4 Sampling Distributions.

Jet + Isolated Photon Triple Differential Cross Section Nikolay Skachkov: “Photon2007”, Paris, 9-13 July 2007 DO Measurement of Triple Differential Photon.

Point source analysis with tracks and showers Aart, Javier, Tino 1.

MINOS Coll Meet. Oxford, Jan CC/NC Data Cross Checks Thomas Osiecki University of Texas at Austin.

P. Ochoa, September Using Muon Removed files to assess the purity of the nubar-PID selection Pedro Ochoa MINOS Collaboration Meeting September 2006.

 Elastic e- e- scattering has very well-known kinematics with a highly correlated energy and angle between the electrons  MC follows these models extremely.

Jet + Isolated Photon Triple Differential Cross Section Nikolay Skachkov: “Photon2007”, Paris, 9-13 July 2007 DO Measurement of Triple Differential Photon.

Beam direction and flux measured by MUMON K. Matsuoka (Kyoto) for the MUMON group Contents: 1.Horn focusing effect 2.Beam stability (direction/flux) 3.Beam.

Wuppertal ttbar strategy meeting 16 August 2012, T. Cornelissen 1 Sebastian, Thijs Status of JetElectron QCD fit in resonance analysis.

Pixel resolution, impact parameter resolution and b-tagging calibrations Attilio Andreazza, Christian Schmitt, Sara Strandberg, Christian Weiser.

GLAST LAT Project LAT Instrument Analysis Meeting– Aug 29, 2005 Hiro Tajima, TKR Updates at SLAC 1 GLAST Large Area Telescope: TKR Updates at SLAC Hiro.

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.

Mark Dorman UCL/RAL MINOS WITW June 05 An Update on Using QE Events to Estimate the Neutrino Flux and Some Preliminary Data/MC Comparisons for a QE Enriched.

Status of K± p±p0 E. De Lucia.

CMSSW_3_1_1 preproduction samples

A PID based approach for antineutrino selection

Matteo Negrini Frascati, Jan 19, 2006

Converted photons efficiency

Neutrinos from BBfit J. Brunner.

Checks of TOF Fiducial Cuts

Interactions of hadrons in the Si-W ECAL

陶军全中科院高能所 Junquan Tao (IHEP/CAS, Beijing)

Beam Tilt & TFC: Can we see a (MC) beam tilt?

Zenith dependence in various Log nergy bins

Photon energy smearing from  events

Study of MDC tuning.

Hit and Tracking Data set used: From loose to tight cuts Pythia p+p

University of Wisconsin-Madison

Presentation transcript:

nubar-PID Nubar-PID distribution for data and MC after: 1) fiducial 2) track quality 3) fit significance data MC data/MC Horn-off

nubar-PID Nubar-PID distribution for data and MC after: 1) fiducial 2) track quality 3) fit significance 4) nubar-PID>0.8 data MC data/MC Horn-off

selection Peak 1 Peak 2 With usual PDFs

selection Peak 1 Peak 2

Before After With more granular PDFs Horn-off Horn-on Before After Before After  Still get the two peaks in NuBarPID

Peak 1 Peak 2 selection

Peak 1 Peak 2 selection

Merging PDF1 & PDF2 (and corrected small bug) Before After (merging PDF1&PDF2) Horn-on MC

Cut at 1.0 Eff:45.62% Pur: 99.73% Cut at 0.95 Eff:47.46% Pur: 99.64% Cut at 0.90 Eff:49.08% Pur: 99.52% Horn-on

Peak 1 Peak 2 selection

Peak 1 Peak 2 selection