[Rivet] Born and dressed level in Rivet

[Andy Buckley]

See here (linked from that page):
http://lcgapp.cern.ch/project/simu/HepPDT/HepPDT.3.04.01/html/namespaceHepPID.html

It's really crazy if the ntuple analysis system doesn't include this...
isn't it in RootCore? Everything else seems to be!

Andy


On 07/11/13 18:33, Ulla Blumenschein wrote:
> Hi Andy,
> 
> Many thanks! I fear though for analyzers using EVNT, AOD, D3PD or
> xAOD formats, we would have to provide
> either an equivalent Tool or list manually the pdgIDs recommeded to
> veto on our physics group wikis.
> (I would advocate an isHadron tool  or a dressing tool that works on xAOD).
> For the moment, I try to  find the src for the isHadron() method  but
> so far I haven't found it yet in
> http://lcgapp.cern.ch/project/simu/HepPDT/
> I would like to compare with Holgers list and then send it to the subconveners..
> 
> Cheers,
> Ulla
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Andy Buckley <andy.buckley at cern.ch> wrote:
>> Yep: at the moment, at least, there is no guarantee of how photon
>> radiation from leptons is to be represented. It could appear as a vertex
>> correction on the photon production, as a set of emissions from the
>> lepton line, or something totally mysterious. Until there's some
>> standard format, a complementary approach that chooses what *not* to
>> accept is safest.
>>
>> Did the study of clustering all non-hadronic photons in an infinite cone
>> (except for a near-beam cut) into a Z definition ever produce any plots?
>> I was told earlier in the week that this "failed" but I would really
>> like to know how it went wrong!
>>
>> By the way, the definition of a particle from a hadron/tau decay used in
>> Rivet is the one here:
>>
>> https://rivet.hepforge.org/trac/browser/src/Core/Particle.cc#L19
>>
>> Note that we use the PID::isHadron() function rather than enumerating
>> "all" hadrons. This is equivalent to the function of the same name
>> provided in HepPID.
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
>> On 07/11/13 17:52, Ulla Blumenschein wrote:
>>> Hi Holger,
>>>
>>> Exactly, this is one of the reasons I  want to advertise your option
>>> as a SM base line ;-)
>>> Do you have this comparative study somewhere in indico? I would like
>>> to send a link to Jan and Pierluigi..
>>>
>>> Many thanks in advance,
>>> Ulla
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Holger Schulz
>>> <hschulz at physik.hu-berlin.de> wrote:
>>>> On 07/11/13 17:35, Ulla Blumenschein wrote:
>>>>> Hi Holger,
>>>>>
>>>>> Many thanks, this sound like a good start. I hope I will soon be able
>>>>> to compare this definition with the currently used definition in SM
>>>>> where we request the photons to come from the W/Z/lepton, depending on
>>>>> the generator..
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers, Ulla
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> No problem.
>>>> I did a similar comparison and found (IIRC) no difference between the two
>>>> methods.
>>>>
>>>> Concerning the method where you ask for photons radiated off of leptons,
>>>> does anyone
>>>> have a feeling how future-proof this would be?
>>>> What if at some point in the future there is a generator which does
>>>> NLO photon radiation, shouldn't that dressing method have an intrinsic
>>>> problem?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Holger
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr Andy Buckley, Royal Society University Research Fellow
>> Particle Physics Expt Group, University of Glasgow / PH Dept, CERN
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Dr Andy Buckley, Royal Society University Research Fellow
Particle Physics Expt Group, University of Glasgow / PH Dept, CERN