1 / 12

p17 JLIP

p17 JLIP. D. Bloch, B. Clément, D. Gelé, I. Ripp-Baudot, V. Siccardi Institut de Recherches Subatomiques - Strasbourg. B-id Meeting 12/08/2005. p17 fixed samples. Now using skimmed CAF trees stored in SAM. Nearly all the stat is used. Final JES is applied on Data but not on MC.

hiroko
Télécharger la présentation

p17 JLIP

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. p17 JLIP D. Bloch, B. Clément, D. Gelé, I. Ripp-Baudot, V. Siccardi Institut de Recherches Subatomiques - Strasbourg B-id Meeting 12/08/2005

  2. p17 fixed samples Now using skimmed CAF trees stored in SAM. Nearly all the stat is used. Final JES is applied on Data but not on MC. A preliminary set of bad lumi blocks and bad runs is rejected. Data : BID : 19M -> 17M with >=2 taggable jet            -> 8M with a muonQCD : 4.9M -> 3.6M with >=2 taggable jetsEM :  5.8M -> 4.1M with >=2 taggable jets MC : ttbar + Zbb + Zbbmu : 370k -> 60k with b->muinjet qcd 20-40 + 40-80 + 80-160 : 620k -> 470k with >=2 taggable jets

  3. JLIP : Jet LIfetime Probability B-tagging algorithm developped by Strasbourg For each calorimeter jet, a probability is computed using the impact parameter information of tracks seen in the SMT layers. PJLIP = probability that all the tracks of a jet come from the primary vertex

  4. Pull Corrections and Resolution functions Final sets of Pull Corrections and Resolution Functions are now available in CVS for both 2-pass PV and adaptive PV.

  5. System8 correction factor for p17 adaptive PV Kb similar for adaptive and 2-pass PV Good agreement between ttbar and Zbb MC

  6. System8 correction factor for p17 adaptive PV B is 1.4% larger for 2-pass than adaptive  2-pass efficiency will be lower Good agreement between ttbar and Zbb MC

  7. 2-pass / Adaptive PV Mistag rate comparison

  8. p14 Mistag rate (2-pass PV) Correction factor SFhf.SFll ~10-20% larger in p17 MC than in p14 => mistag ~10-20% larger in p17 but in good agreement with MC (<10%)

  9. Mistag rate in Data and MC (adaptive PV)

  10. B-tag efficiency in mu-in-jet Data and MC Still no agreement between MC and Data, but better in p17 (ratio of 0.8) than in p14 (0.7)

  11. JLIP performance in Data Good agreement between p14 and p17 : the difference mainly comes from the scale factor SFhf.SFll larger in p17 MC. Good agreement between p17 adaptive and p17 2-pass.

  12. Conclusion •  Final sets of Pull Corrections and Resolution Functions available for both 2-pass PV and adaptive PV. • mistag rate larger in p17 data but in good agreement with MC • b-tag efficiency : still no agreement between MC and Data, but better than in p14 • Waiting for the final JES for MC

More Related