[Rivet] ATLAS ttbar+jets analysis

[Andy Buckley]

Can someone check Riccardo's concern? I am just merging the final ATLAS
analyses into Rivet for the 2.2.0 release, so time is running out to get
a correct version of this analysis into the release.

Any news about the pseudojet observable cross-checking, Will?

Andy


On 11/09/14 10:11, Riccardo Di Sipio wrote:
> 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
> 


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