[Rivet] Rivet routine for D0_2000_I503361

[Frank Siegert]

Hi Holger,

If this is normalised using the actual cross section as indicated in the y
axis labels, then I'm surprised that NLO predictions are 15% low in the
hard region. But adding the electron cuts will worsen this even more, so I
don't have any constructive idea on how to improve this... Let's put it in
like this as our best and (somewhat) validated guess.

Cheers,
Frank
Am 02.10.2015 16:10 schrieb "Holger Schulz" <holger.schulz at durham.ac.uk>:

> Hi all,
>
> here is the version without the electron cut on Et with LJET:=2 and NJET:=1
>
> https://users.hepforge.org/~holsch/d01-x01-y01.pdf
>
> There are some Sherpa issues with primordial kT at tevatron run
> conditions, apart
> from that this looks pretty ok to me.
>
> Holger
>
>
>
> On 02/10/15 09:12, Frank Siegert wrote:
>
> Thanks, this is exactly what I was after.
>
> Holger, which direction does the 15-20% offset go? Did you really set
> LJET:=1 (this would mean the 2->1 process is done at NLO, i.e. nothing
> here) or did you mean LJET:=2?
>
> Comparing to NLO we should definitely not see a 15-20% global offset,
> and this could point to wrong lepton cuts.
>
> Cheers,
> Frank
>
>
> On 1 October 2015 at 20:04, Gavin Hesketh <gavin.hesketh at ucl.ac.uk> <gavin.hesketh at ucl.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> sorry for weighting in again, but I'm pretty sure there should not be an ET
> cut on the electrons... Section V in the paper mentions correcting for this.
> Do the distributions look completely off if you remove that cut?
> cheers,
> Gavin
>
>
> On 01/10/15 16:01, Holger Schulz wrote:
>
>
> On 01/10/15 15:43, Frank Siegert wrote:
>
>
> Hi Holger,
>
> given that you have committed this analysis now as validated (using
> Sherpa), I was just wondering whether the normalisation looks as
> expected. Simone mentioned that his validation was done using Pythia8,
> and it would be surprising that Pythia8 matches the cross section
> correctly -- one would expect a global ~ -15% offset due to the
> missing NLO accuracy.
>
> Have you compared it against NLO Sherpa (or LO Sherpa scaled with an
> appropriate k-factor) and see good agreement? Anything else could
> point to missing (lepton?) cuts.
>
>
>
> Hi Frank,
>
> the paper states an ET cut for the electrons of at least 25 GeV, I
> implemented
> that one. I ran Sherpa with LJET=1, NJET=1 using the example setup and see
> a shape very much compatible with data. The offset is about 15-20%. I ran
> 100000 weighted events using trunk without MI_HANDLER
>
> Here is the shape comparison for the peak region:
>
>     https://users.hepforge.org/~holsch/d01-x01-y01.pdf
>
> And this is the distribution up to zpt=150 GeV:
>
>     https://users.hepforge.org/~holsch/d01-x01-y01_150GeV.pdf
>
> Cheers,
> Holger
>
>
> Cheers,
> Frank
>
>
>
> On 28 September 2015 at 11:39, Simone Amoroso<simo.amoroso at gmail.com> <simo.amoroso at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Frank,
>
> For the selections (since the paper was not really clear), I copied what
> was used in the Z/W pT ratio (already in RIVET),
> which makes use of the same selections.
>
> The validation was simply made by running Pythia8, I definitely didn’t
> apply k-factors,
> but I might have rescaled the prediction to data (I honestly don’t
> remember).
>
> cheers,
> Simone
>
>
> On 23 Sep 2015, at 16:07, Frank Siegert<frank.siegert at cern.ch> <frank.siegert at cern.ch>  wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I have just started to look at this to get it in for the imminent
> release. The paper is at first glance not very clear on which
> selection requirements were retained for the final cross section
> measurement. Simone, do you remember, why you removed the electron ET
> cuts? Did they correct completely for the electron acceptance?
>
> And for your validation plot, I was wondering which Monte-Carlo did
> you run, and is the prediction scaled by a (K-)factor?
>
> Cheers,
> Frank
>
>
>
> On 1 July 2015 at 15:57, Chris Pollard<cpollard at cern.ch> <cpollard at cern.ch>  wrote:
>
>
> Hi Simone,
>
> In this analysis I notice that there is no lepton pt cut imposed in
> the
> ZFinder. Was this intentional? I guess at least one lepton needs to
> have pT
>
>
> 10 GeV to fire the trigger?
>
>
> Chris
>
> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Andy Buckley<andy.buckley at cern.ch> <andy.buckley at cern.ch>
> wrote:
>
>
> On 07/05/15 07:55, Simone Amoroso wrote:
>
>
> Hi Andy,
>
> I made a new RIVET routine for the D0 RunI measurement of the Z pT.
> Below a validation plot and attached the tarball.
>
>
> Thanks Simone, I've put it in the analysis contrib area and we'll get
> it
> into a new Rivet release as soon as possible.
>
> Andy
>
> --
> Dr Andy Buckley, Lecturer / Royal Society University Research Fellow
> Particle Physics Expt Group, University of Glasgow
> _______________________________________________
> Rivet mailing listRivet at projects.hepforge.orghttps://www.hepforge.org/lists/listinfo/rivet
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rivet mailing listRivet at projects.hepforge.orghttps://www.hepforge.org/lists/listinfo/rivet
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rivet mailing listRivet at projects.hepforge.orghttps://www.hepforge.org/lists/listinfo/rivet
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rivet mailing listRivet at projects.hepforge.orghttps://www.hepforge.org/lists/listinfo/rivet
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rivet mailing listRivet at projects.hepforge.orghttps://www.hepforge.org/lists/listinfo/rivet
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rivet mailing listRivet at projects.hepforge.orghttps://www.hepforge.org/lists/listinfo/rivet
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.hepforge.org/lists-archive/rivet/attachments/20151004/606feeee/attachment.html>