1 / 7

Improved Parameterization for Universal Curve Fits in Particle Physics Analysis

This paper discusses a new method for parameterizing particle energy distributions using Z = log(E_measured/E_predicted) and evaluates its effectiveness in comparing with the K0S from TTT. It highlights that while E_measured – E_predicted shows a non-Gaussian nature, the Z transformation yields a better description, particularly in the tails relevant for likelihood analyses. The study also investigates biases in K0S distributions and suggests that current parameterization methods may be inadequate. A need for further constraints and comparisons with minimum bias data is emphasized.

morwen
Télécharger la présentation

Improved Parameterization for Universal Curve Fits in Particle Physics Analysis

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. More universal curve fits Matthew Jones May 4, 2004 • New stuff: • Parameterize using Z = log(Emeasured/Epredicted) • Compare with K0S from TTT

  2. Distribution of dE/dx • Emeasured – Epredicted is not Gaussian but Z=log(Emeasured/Epredicted) is. • Mostly affects the descrption of the tails:

  3. Distribution of dE/dx • Z is used by other experiments (eg, STAR) (not in itself a good reason to use it…) • Tails are more important in likelihood analyses. • Better (still not perfect) description of inclusive particle fractions

  4. Fitted distributions in Z • Comparison: New Old Smaller value of -log(likelihood) for Z-fit.

  5. Biases in K0S from TTT • Not large, but significant: Mean = 0.0450§ 0.0006 Mean = 0.0436§ 0.0005

  6. Biases in K0S from TTT • Pull distributions: Mean=0.411§ 0.005 RMS = 0.875§ 0.004 Mean=0.437§ 0.005 RMS = 0.921§ 0.004

  7. Current issues • Is the “standard CDF” parameterization adequate? • Better way to parameterize resolution? • I think it is currently overestimated • Probably would benefit from constraints at higher momentum (eg, e+e-,K0S+-) • Need to compare with K0S from minimum bias data

More Related