[Rivet] CMS_2013_I1208923

[Holger Schulz]

On 04/10/15 23:47, Andy Buckley wrote:
> On 04/10/15 19:43, Holger Schulz wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> so the thing with this QCD analysis is that I validated their stuff
>> quite some time ago but did  change they didn't like.
>>
>> Namely, they submitted the code as two analyses, one for
>> dijets and one for inclusive jets. The cuts and analysis workflows
>> are exactly the same. So I thought it might be smarter to
>> have one analysis which fills d sigma / d p_T for each selected
>> jet and M_jj in case of dijet events rather than having
>> the two fill commands in separate but identical analysis
>> flows.
>>
>> Should I just add this as it is and be done with it or should we
>> obey?
>
> Hi Holger, all,
>
> Are the two analyses from the same paper, taking data from (duplicates 
> of) the same HepData entry, etc.?
It's just one hepdata entry:
http://hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1208923


>
> If so, then I indeed think it is helpful to users, *and* to us as 
> maintainers, to combine the analyses into a single code. Maybe Xavier 
> can explain the justification to split them? -- since it sounds like 
> they would operate on the same events, and the results should be 
> identical.
Ok, I'll inquire :)

Thanks,
Holger
>
> If they are different publications (seems a priori unlikely...) then I 
> think they should be separate codes too, despite the logical 
> duplication. There are already plenty of analyses with similar logic, 
> and overall it is not worth losing sleep (or friends) over ;-)
>
> Andy
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.hepforge.org/lists-archive/rivet/attachments/20151005/500bfeec/attachment.html>