|
[Rivet] ATLAS ttbar+jets analysisRiccardo Di Sipio Riccardo.DiSipio at bo.infn.itThu Sep 11 10:11:01 BST 2014
Hi, I think I need a clarification. In ATLAS_2014_I1304688.cc L.121-139 I noticed that if the _overlap variable is set true, the whole event is vetoed. I thought the action to take in such a case was to remove the overlapping object, then proceed to cut on the good final state objects (1 el/mu, >=4jets, btags, etc). Cheers, Riccardo On 10/set/2014, at 21:54, Andy Buckley <andy.buckley at cern.ch> wrote: > On 10/09/14 19:34, Dominic Hirschbühl wrote: >> Hi Andy, >> >> it seems that we have some momentum to get our "top routines" running in >> Rivet 2. > > Indeed... and Thomas Balestri has already converted at least one of your > v1 routines: not bad for one day! > >> From discussion with Alexander and from your mails I got, that the >> truth definitions from Will are in the 2.2.0beta release. >> We would like to change our routines to these definitions. >> >> Since we are working with EVGEN files, what is the timeline to get this >> release or 2.2.0 into Athena? > > We won't put the beta into Athena, but the remaining obstacles before > releasing 2.2.0 are a few minor technical tweaks, copying in the newly > submitted analyses, and validating against the previous release. I'm > hoping to get it out next week, and then updating Athena to use that new > release is easy. > > Andy > > > >> Am 03.09.2014 13:32, schrieb Andy Buckley: >>> Thanks for letting us know, Will. We have a few technical tasks >>> remaining before releasing Rivet 2.2.0 and I'll happily accept your code >>> anytime before release (well, maybe not 5 mins before!) >>> >>> Andy >>> >>> >>> On 03/09/14 10:33, William Hamish Bell wrote: >>>> Hi Dominic, >>>> >>>> Yes, sure. I have implemented the analysis in RIVET, using the latest version of RIVET. The code runs and the cut flow in the code has been completely cross-checked against standalone code running on the same data. The cut flow exactly agrees. However, the pseudo-top distributions do not agree with those in the pseudo-top paper, despite being coded from the text of the paper and internal note. This is under urgent investigation. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> Will >>>> >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: Dominic Hirschbuehl [dhirsch at mail.cern.ch] >>>> Sent: 03 September 2014 11:29 >>>> To: William Hamish Bell >>>> Cc: Alexander Josef Grohsjean; Andy Buckley; roman lysak; Rivet; Kiran Joshi; hirsch at physik.uni-wuppertal.de >>>> Subject: Re: [Rivet] ATLAS ttbar+jets analysis >>>> >>>> Hi Will, >>>> >>>> I have to give a status report in the MC generator meeting this >>>> afternoon and tomorrow in the top meeting. >>>> >>>> Could you give me an update, where you are now with the pseduo top now? >>>> >>>> Then I started to run Rivet myself on the various samples and I try to >>>> collect all routines we have for top processes, could you send me a >>>> preliminary version as soon as possible? >>>> >>>> Thanks in advance >>>> Dominic >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 02:08:46PM +0000, William Hamish Bell wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I am back at CERN now. I am working on the RIVET code again and should be finished quickly. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> >>>>> Will >>>>> >>>>> On Aug 13, 2014, at 10:22 PM, Alexander Grohsjean wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Andy, hi Will >>>>>> >>>>>> great! Thanks a lot! >>>>>> Regarding the pseudo-tops, maybe Will can comment as this is his >>>>>> analysis. My understanding is that with all the modifications we just made, >>>>>> it should be easy to provide. Will wanted to do it but then had to move house >>>>>> from Geneva to UK etc. So I have no news since then. >>>>>> It would be really great for us to have it and not use the parton-level tops! >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers and thanks again, Alexander. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Am 13.08.2014 um 18:55 schrieb Andy Buckley: >>>>>>> Thanks Alexander, that's great. I've merged it into the trunk of Rivet >>>>>>> now, and there should be a beta release of that for testing by the end >>>>>>> of the week. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Do I hear that there is also a pseudo-top analysis that we could maybe >>>>>>> get in, too? Or anything else in the pipeline? Please get them to us >>>>>>> before the end of August if you want them in the 2.2.0 Rivet release. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 12/08/14 16:15, Alexander Grohsjean wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi Andy, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> sorry for the problems with the info file. I didn't test it. >>>>>>>> In fact, I never paid attention to all the features it has. :-) >>>>>>>> I hope everything is ok now. I tested it, added titles to the histos, >>>>>>>> and changed the ranges. >>>>>>>> Let me know in case there is something I missed. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers, Alexander. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Am 11.08.2014 um 18:28 schrieb Andy Buckley: >>>>>>>>> Hi Alexander, all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks. I had to fix some syntax errors in the .info file, however, in >>>>>>>>> order for it to parse and allow running. Did you ever actually test with >>>>>>>>> this .info? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As requested, can you change the name of the analysis to the standard >>>>>>>>> format and update the .info file. As well as the typo (the second >>>>>>>>> reference is accidentally parsed as a map key due to a space after >>>>>>>>> "arXiv:"), there are some obvious errors like the ToDo key still being >>>>>>>>> present, the analysis being marked as UNVALIDATED, and I think what is >>>>>>>>> listed as SpiresID should actually be InspireID (and the analysis should >>>>>>>>> be named accordingly with an S or an I according to whether the number >>>>>>>>> is SPIRES or Inspire: the latter is now strongly preferred.) There might >>>>>>>>> be more... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks again -- once you get me these updated metadata files I will >>>>>>>>> merge this into version control for the next version of Rivet. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 11/08/14 14:25, Alexander Grohsjean wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Hi Andy, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> please find the files attached. >>>>>>>>>> Looks like they were lost in all the emails. >>>>>>>>>> The analysis is on arXiv, so public. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks again for all the work. >>>>>>>>>> Cheers, Alexander. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Am 11.08.2014 um 15:16 schrieb Andy Buckley: >>>>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I've added the FromElectroweakDecay to the release branch for Rivet >>>>>>>>>>> 2.2.0 with the name PromptFinalState. I had to make a few tweaks to it, >>>>>>>>>>> since e.g. the compare method wasn't accounting for the "accept tau >>>>>>>>>>> decays" flag and there were some possible generator-specific ways for >>>>>>>>>>> the classification logic to go wrong... but basically it went in >>>>>>>>>>> without >>>>>>>>>>> problems. Thanks! >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I've modified the ATLAS_ttjets analysis code to fit with our coding >>>>>>>>>>> standards etc., make use of a few more Rivet code convenience features >>>>>>>>>>> and the sortByPt function, and to use the new ghost b-tagging that I >>>>>>>>>>> wrote last week. I've attached a copy of that for your information. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I don't think I messed anything up, but it needs to be tested to be >>>>>>>>>>> certain. I didn't find a .info, .plot, or .yoda reference file in the >>>>>>>>>>> tarball and will need at least the last of these to do some testing. >>>>>>>>>>> Finally, is this analysis allowed to go public yet? If so, it will need >>>>>>>>>>> the name to be changed to the standard scheme ATLAS_2013_Ixxxxxx scheme >>>>>>>>>>> -- I can do that for the .cc file if you're otherwise happy with it, >>>>>>>>>>> but >>>>>>>>>>> would appreciate if you can supply the .info and .plot in the final >>>>>>>>>>> form. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 11/08/14 10:15, Alexander Grohsjean wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Andy! >>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, Alexander. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Am 09.08.2014 um 23:31 schrieb Andy Buckley: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22/07/14 15:49, Alexander Grohsjean wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear Andy, dear all, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I checked out the dev version and modified my stuff to get it >>>>>>>>>>>>>> working. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (mainly ClusteredLepton was changed to DressedLepton). >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Attached you can find my modified/added files that are running in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>>>>>>>> version. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are 3 points which affect rivet in general (except the new >>>>>>>>>>>>>> projection), so I added this to the README but would like to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> discuss it >>>>>>>>>>>>>> now. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I added a p T sorting to dressedleptons, something that I couldn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>> find. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> If it is not my mistake and I missed it, I think >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that is something usefull to add as other projections can be sorted. >>>>>>>>>>>>> There are already sorting routines, including sortByPt, for all >>>>>>>>>>>>> containers of classes that behave like FourMomentum. I'll change the >>>>>>>>>>>>> code to do that. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I changed the containsb function in Jet.cc to include ghost >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tagging. Not >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sure how you like to get this into rivet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are various way of doing it and I am sure you have a prefered >>>>>>>>>>>>>> option. You can easily follow my modifications, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> there are detailed in the file. Same for adding the ghost b >>>>>>>>>>>>>> hadrons in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> FastJets.cc. Maybe you also want to have the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for c jets? >>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this was started a long time ago by James Monk but was never >>>>>>>>>>>>> finished. I rewrote it last week along with other Rivet::Jet / >>>>>>>>>>>>> fastjet::PseudoJet interoperability improvements, and it also does c >>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>> tau tagging, so I should just be able to use that functionality >>>>>>>>>>>>> directly >>>>>>>>>>>>> and skip these patches. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not sure what I can check with Roman apart from the validation I >>>>>>>>>>>>>> already >>>>>>>>>>>>>> did (object level for 5000 events looking at jets, leptons, cuts >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the final plots I provided)? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe it is useful to run, once everything is in, on a small sample >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> check it, but apart from that, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am not sure I can do more. Let me know. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds like it's already sorted. Thanks. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regarding the jet gap fraction analysis. Officially (rivet page) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> clearly written that one needs dilepton events. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The problem with the projection was when running on at least one >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lepton >>>>>>>>>>>>>> events, like we have them usually in ttbar @ 7 TeV. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I assume Kiran et al. were using a home-made filter. In that case >>>>>>>>>>>>>> there >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is no problem. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now if you are running on ttbar events without filter, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> projection >>>>>>>>>>>>>> would select you ll events and you can compare it with the data we >>>>>>>>>>>>>> have. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> But from a technical point everything is ok, the page clearly says >>>>>>>>>>>>>> dilepton. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks again. I also discussed this in an MC physics / tuning meeting >>>>>>>>>>>>> with Stefano Camarda, to see if there would be a way to run this >>>>>>>>>>>>> analysis before the new Rivet is available. Seems not -- which is >>>>>>>>>>>>> ok, I >>>>>>>>>>>>> just wanted to know if there was a pragmatic shortcut to get it into >>>>>>>>>>>>> tuning asap. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll merge in a version of FromElectroweakDecay now, and let you >>>>>>>>>>>>> know if >>>>>>>>>>>>> I've got any more questions. Thanks. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 22.07.2014 13:33, schrieb Andy Buckley: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22/07/14 11:56, Alexander Grohsjean wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was prodividing the tools that we changed in a tar bal with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> modified/added files. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I summarized quickly the changes in a README in the main path. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I must admit that I am not sure what is missing here. Diff >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> very easy to run and to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see the changes providing this? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The issue is that we need a minimal diff against the latest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ideally against the 2.1.x branch head since other things have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and we don't want to just copy your files in place and overwrite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other developments. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Changing names "FromElecroweakDecay" is perfectly fine with us, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just historically. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I started developing in 2.1.0, then updated to 2.1.1 at some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> point but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't switch to 2.1.2 as this happened after my validation. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Should I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now run it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2.1.2? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since it's not just a new analysis, working from the *development* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version (i.e. the target for 2.1.3, which has evolved since 2.1.2) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> help us a lot with integrating these changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You can get the branch head like this: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hg clone https://rivet.hepforge.org/hg/rivet -b release-2-0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then make changes and commit them if you need, and point us at your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cloned repo when ready. Ask if you have any questions! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For validation, I attached the same distributions that we have in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> paper (blue and red with ct10). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Should I provide the log-files from object by object comparisons? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> These are the internal notes: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jet multiplicity supporting note >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://cds.cern.ch/record/1532076 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jet pT supporting note >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://cds.cern.ch/record/1545583 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that's for ATLAS internal validation purposes... I'm >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wearing my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rivet hat here, which means that I assume you and Roman have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> checked >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everything and we just need to deal with the technicalities. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Although >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> since there are new projections we will be pickier than with just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accepting a new analysis ;-) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> By the way, I saw a report from Stefano Camarda that at least the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> important ttbar jet veto analysis (and maybe also the ttbar jet >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shapes) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do not properly require "prompt" leptons and hence the results >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> differ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> due to the allowed W decay channels. Could you also fix these to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FromElectroweakDecay projection? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 21.07.2014 20:59, schrieb roman lysak: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Andy, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 21/07/14 16:14, Andy Buckley wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Roman, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've seen this analysis already and realised the issue. This >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> case >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where it would have been nice if we could have worked with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> authors >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to discuss the new projections and get them directly into the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rivet >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trunk rather than need to do it retrospectively. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It would help us if you/they could provide diffs with respect >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> latest Rivet version -- have these modifications been made on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> top of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version 2.1.2? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have been made w.r.t. version 2.1.1, as far as I know. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We need to make sure that we don't undo our own >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> developments when merging this. Having looked at the source >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FromElectroweakDecay projection, it doesn't actually do what >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> name >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suggests, so I would like to change that to match the sort of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> scheme >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we've used for Particle.fromDecay(), or perhaps define >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IsPrompt / >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IsNonPrompt particle classifiers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Getting a new Rivet out with these features and some others in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the BOOST conference in mid-August is high on my priority >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> list, so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be back in touch. But if you can talk with Will and Alexander >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (right?) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> right, cc-ing to them, so that the communication is hopefully >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> quicker >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to make minimal patches (or ideally an hg branch that we can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clone, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> modify and merge) that we can apply, that would help a lot. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alex, Will, could you try to do as suggested by Andy, i.e. at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> least >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> try to compare to Rivet 2.1.2? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks a lot, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roman >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 21/07/14 15:03, Roman Lysak wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear Rivet authors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in ATLAS, we've got another analysis we would like to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> included into Rivet (right now, it's being validated): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ttbar+jets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> analysis. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, while implementing this analysis, the authors made >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some core Rivet routines (FastJet, Jet, and DressedLepton >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> projections) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and also added one new Projection (FromElectroweakDecay). I'm >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attaching >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the changes they made. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We would like to ask you, what would be the best way to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proceed: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whether >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you would be willing to accept any of the updates to the core >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> routines >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or you would prefer to have everything implemented inside the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> analysis >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> routine (in the second case, the validation/re-validation will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> probably >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> take longer, obviously :)). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roman >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rivet mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rivet at projects.hepforge.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.hepforge.org/lists/listinfo/rivet >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> -- >>>> /---------------------------------------------------------------------\ >>>> | Dr. Dominic Hirschbuehl | >>>> \ Bergische Universitaet Wuppertal - Exp. Elementarteilchenphysik / >>>> / hirsch at physik.uni-wuppertal.de / dominic.hirschbuehl at cern.ch \ >>>> | office : D.09.22 phone : 0049 - 202 - 439 - 3751 | >>>> \---------------------------------------------------------------------/ >>>> >>> >> > > > -- > Dr Andy Buckley, Royal Society University Research Fellow > Particle Physics Expt Group, University of Glasgow / PH Dept, CERN > _______________________________________________ > Rivet mailing list > Rivet at projects.hepforge.org > https://www.hepforge.org/lists/listinfo/rivet
More information about the Rivet mailing list |