\documentclass[xcolor=svgnames]{beamer}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[english]{babel}
\usepackage{polski}
%\usepackage{amssymb,amsmath}
%\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
%\usepackage{amsmath}
%\newcommand\abs[1]{\left|#1\right|}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\newcommand\abs[1]{\left|#1\right|}
\usepackage{hepnicenames}
\usepackage{hepunits}
\usepackage{color}
\usepackage{feynmp}
\usepackage{pst-pdf}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\usepackage{xcolor}

\setbeamertemplate{footline}{\insertframenumber/\inserttotalframenumber}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5
\definecolor{mygreen}{cmyk}{0.82,0.11,1,0.25}


\usetheme{Sybila} 
\title[Overlap or $\color{white} B^0 \to K^{\ast} \mu \mu$, PPTS meeting]{Overlap for $\color{white} B^0 \to K^{\ast} \mu \mu$}

 \author[Marcin Chrzaszcz]{
      Thomas Blake\inst{1}, \underline{Marcin Chrzaszcz}\inst{2,3}, Sam Cunliffe\inst{4}, Christoph Langenbruch\inst{1}, Konstantinos Petridis\inst{4}, Nicola Serra\inst{2}}
    
  \institute[UW, UZH, IFJ, IC]{  
$ ^1$ University of Warwick\\
$ ^2$ University of Zurich\\
$ ^3$ Institute of Nuclear Physics, Krakow\\
$ ^4$ Imperial College London\\{~}\\

Physics Performance, Trigger and Stripping meeting
        }
\date{\today}
\begin{document}
% --------------------------- SLIDE --------------------------------------------
\frame[plain]{\titlepage}
\author{Marcin Chrz\k{a}szcz}
% ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% --------------------------- SLIDE --------------------------------------------

\institute{~(UZH, IFJ)}


   %   \begin{frame}\frametitle{Outline}
   %     \begin{enumerate}
   %       \item introduction\vspace{.5em}
   %       \item multivariate technique\vspace{.5em}
   %       \item normalisation\vspace{.5em}
  % %       \item backgrounds\vspace{.5em}
  %        \item expected sensitivity\vspace{.5em}
  %        \item model dependence\vspace{.5em} data from Reco14Stripping20(r1)
  %      \end{enumerate}
    %    Major news wrt.\ the $1~fb^{-1}$ analysis are highlighted in \textcolor{mygreen}{green}
  %    \end{frame}

      \begin{frame}\frametitle{Outline}
          \tableofcontents
      \end{frame}




 \begin{frame}
        \frametitle{Yellow pages}
        	Previous presentations:
        	\begin{itemize}
	   \item $\PBzero \to \PKstar \mu \mu$ meeting: \href{https://indico.cern.ch/event/290864/contribution/0/material/slides/0.pdf}{\url{https://indico.cern.ch/event/290864/contribution/0/material/slides/0.pdf}}.
      	   \item $\PBzero \to \PKstar \mu \mu$ meeting: \href{https://indico.cern.ch/event/290864/contribution/2/material/slides/1.pdf}{\url{https://indico.cern.ch/event/290864/contribution/2/material/slides/1.pdf}}.
         	   
      	     \item  PPTS meeting: \href{https://indico.cern.ch/event/288654/contribution/2/material/slides/0.pdf}{\url{https://indico.cern.ch/event/288654/contribution/2/material/slides/0.pdf}}.   
      	   
        \end{itemize}
       
      \end{frame}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

\section{Introduction}
 \begin{frame}
        \frametitle{What we are trying to explain}
  	     In July we freeze the selection for $\PBzero \to \PKstar \mu \mu$:  \href{https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/LHCbPhysics/BdToKstarMuMu/LHCb-INT-2013-058_v1r1.pdf}{LHCb-INT-2013-058}
  	     	 \begin{itemize}
				\item New selection is based on simplified BDT:(less variables, larger dataset)
				\item Modified vetoes for exclusive backgrounds
				\item Moved from Stripping 17 RECO12 $\to$ Stripping 20 RECO14.
				\item A question raised by Tom:
				\begin{itemize}
				\item \begin{center}
				''What is the overlap for the new and old selection\\
on the 2011 data sample?''
				\end{center}
				\end{itemize}
				\item By product: check any potential bias of events not common in both RECOs, check how well we can model this things in MC(needed for acceptance corrections),  
			%	\item First attempt: Take old ntuples and match events using a unique numbers: event-number and run-number.
      	   			
      	   
        \end{itemize}
       
      \end{frame}
      %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5
      \section{Data driven studies}
      \begin{frame}
        \frametitle{Data comparison}
	       
         \begin{block}{Method 1:}
          {~}{~}Take old ntuples and match events using a unique numbers: event-number and run-number. Study the missing events from one data sample.
           		 \end{block}
	   \begin{columns}
	   
  \column{0.1in}{~}
  \column{2.1in}
\begin{exampleblock}{Advantages}
  \begin{itemize}
  \item Comparing directly samples that we do our analysis on.

  
    \end{itemize}

    		 \end{exampleblock}


  \column{2.1in}
  \begin{alertblock}{Disadvantages}
  \begin{itemize}
  \item Different stripping.
  \item Not easy to disentangle different contributions.
  \item Event alignment problems(recovered).
  \end{itemize}
    		 \end{alertblock}
  

  
  \end{columns}		 
  		  	Data samples used for studies:
  		  	\begin{itemize}
  		  	  	\item RECO12, Stripping 17, full selection, old BDT. Fixed sample.
  	\item RECO14, Stripping 20, full selection.
  		  	\end{itemize}

   	   \end{frame}

   	   
   	   
   	   
   	   
   	  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
      \frame{
\frametitle{with BDT, signal region}
\scalebox{0.65}{
\begin{tabular}{r r r r r r r r}\hline
$q^2 [\GeV^2]$ & $N_{\rm old}$ &  $N_{\rm new}$ & $N_{\rm common}$ & $N_{\rm old}^{\rm only}$ & $N_{\rm new}^{\rm only}$ & $N_{\rm common}/N_{\rm old} [\%]$ & $N_{\rm common}/N_{\rm old\,\cup\,new} [\%]$\\ \hline \hline
$[0.1, 2]$ & $162$ & $156$ & $105$ & $57$ & $51$ & $64.8$ & $49.3$\\ \hline
$[2, 4]$ & $101$ & $91$ & $60$ & $41$ & $31$ & $59.4$ & $45.5$\\ \hline
$[4, 6]$ & $111$ & $107$ & $66$ & $45$ & $41$ & $59.5$ & $43.4 $\\ \hline
$[6, 8]$ & $165$ & $144$ & $98$ & $67$ & $46$ & $59.4$ & $46.4$\\ \hline
$(m_{\PJpsi}\pm0.05)^2$ & $102102$ & $105000$ & $77678$ & $24424$ & $27322$ & $76.1$ & $60.0$\\ \hline
$[11, 12.5]$ & $88$ & $110$ & $63$ & $25$ & $47$ & $71.6$ & $46.7$\\ \hline
$[15, 17]$ & $121$ & $148$ & $88$ & $33$ & $60$ & $72.7 $ & $48.6$\\ \hline
$[17, 19]$ & $79$ & $109$ & $59$ & $20$ & $50$ & $74.7$ & $45.7$\\ 
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
{~~}\\{~~}\\
Helicity angles in different RECO samples:\\
\begin{center}
\begin{columns}
\column{1.7in}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{notaligned_withbdt/overlap_costhetak.pdf}
\column{1.7in}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{notaligned_withbdt/overlap_costhetal.pdf}
\column{1.7in}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{notaligned_withbdt/overlap_phi.pdf}

\end{columns}
\end{center}

}
   	   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
   	   \frame{
\frametitle{with BDT, background region}
\scalebox{0.65}{
\begin{tabular}{rrrrrrrr}\hline
$q^2 [\GeV^2]$ & $N_{\rm old}$ &  $N_{\rm new}$ & $N_{\rm common}$ & $N_{\rm old}^{\rm only}$ & $N_{\rm new}^{\rm only}$ & $N_{\rm common}/N_{\rm old} [\%]$ & $N_{\rm common}/N_{\rm old\,\cup\,new} [\%]$\\ \hline\hline
$[0.1, 2]$ & $33$ & $11$ & $2$ & $31$ & $9$ & $6.1$ & $4.8$\\
$[2, 4]$ & $50$ & $25$ & $10$ & $40$ & $15$ & $20.0$ & $15.4$\\
$[4, 6]$ & $37$ & $28$ & $4$ & $33$ & $24$ & $10.8$ & $6.6$\\
$[6, 8]$ & $32$ & $32$ & $7$ & $25$ & $25$ & $21.9$ & $12.3$\\
$(m_{\PJpsi}\pm0.05)^2$ & $1751$ & $1773$ & $549$ & $1202$ & $1224$ & $31.4$ & $18.5$\\
$[11, 12.5]$ & $35$ & $25$ & $9$ & $26$ & $16$ & $25.7$ & $17.6$\\
$[15, 17]$ & $27$ & $18$ & $5$ & $22$ & $13$ & $18.5$ & $12.5$\\
$[17, 19]$ & $27$ & $15$ & $1$ & $26$ & $14$ & $3.7$ & $2.4$\\
\hline\end{tabular}
}
}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5
   	  \frame{
\frametitle{without BDT, signal region}
\scalebox{0.65}{
\begin{tabular}{rrrrrrrr}\hline
$q^2 [\GeV^2]$ & $N_{\rm old}$ &  $N_{\rm new}$ & $N_{\rm common}$ & $N_{\rm old}^{\rm only}$ & $N_{\rm new}^{\rm only}$ & $N_{\rm common}/N_{\rm old} [\%]$ & $N_{\rm common}/N_{\rm old\,\cup\,new} [\%]$\\ \hline\hline
$[0.1, 2]$ & $162$ & $320$ & $119$ & $43$ & $201$ & $73.5$ & $32.8$\\
$[2, 4]$ & $101$ & $416$ & $75$ & $26$ & $341$ & $74.3$ & $17.0$\\
$[4, 6]$ & $111$ & $409$ & $78$ & $33$ & $331$ & $70.3$ & $17.6$\\
$[6, 8]$ & $165$ & $499$ & $118$ & $47$ & $381$ & $71.5$ & $21.6$\\
$(m_{\PJpsi}\pm0.05)^2$ & $102102$ & $125084$ & $83995$ & $18107$ & $41089$ & $82.3$ & $58.7$\\
$[11, 12.5]$ & $88$ & $359$ & $69$ & $19$ & $290$ & $78.4$ & $18.3$\\
$[15, 17]$ & $121$ & $478$ & $99$ & $22$ & $379$ & $81.8$ & $19.8$\\
$[17, 19]$ & $79$ & $377$ & $65$ & $14$ & $312$ & $82.3$ & $16.6$\\
\hline\end{tabular}
}
{~~}\\{~~}\\
Helicity angles in different RECO samples:\\
\begin{center}
\begin{columns}
\column{1.7in}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{notaligned_withoutbdt/overlap_costhetak.pdf}
\column{1.7in}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{notaligned_withoutbdt/overlap_costhetal.pdf}
\column{1.7in}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{notaligned_withoutbdt/overlap_phi.pdf}

\end{columns}
\end{center}
}
   	\frame{
\frametitle{without BDT, background region}
\scalebox{0.65}{
\begin{tabular}{rrrrrrrr}\hline
$q^2 [\GeV^2]$ & $N_{\rm old}$ &  $N_{\rm new}$ & $N_{\rm common}$ & $N_{\rm old}^{\rm only}$ & $N_{\rm new}^{\rm only}$ & $N_{\rm common}/N_{\rm old} [\%]$ & $N_{\rm common}/N_{\rm old\,\cup\,new} [\%]$\\ \hline\hline
$[0.1, 2]$ & $33$ & $457$ & $18$ & $15$ & $439$ & $54.5$ & $3.8$\\
$[2, 4]$ & $50$ & $643$ & $33$ & $17$ & $610$ & $66.0$ & $5.0$\\
$[4, 6]$ & $37$ & $634$ & $18$ & $19$ & $616$ & $48.6$ & $2.8$\\
$[6, 8]$ & $32$ & $650$ & $21$ & $11$ & $629$ & $65.6$ & $3.2$\\
$(m_{\PJpsi}\pm0.05)^2$ & $1751$ & $7976$ & $857$ & $894$ & $7119$ & $48.9$ & $9.7$\\
$[11, 12.5]$ & $35$ & $466$ & $23$ & $12$ & $443$ & $65.7$ & $4.8$\\
$[15, 17]$ & $27$ & $603$ & $16$ & $11$ & $587$ & $59.3$ & $2.6$\\
$[17, 19]$ & $27$ & $678$ & $16$ & $11$ & $662$ & $59.3$ & $2.3$\\
\hline\end{tabular}
}
}

\frame{
\frametitle{with BDT, $p_T>250\MeV$, signal region}
\begin{itemize}
\item $p_T$ was inherit from  CommonParticles in S17, removed in S20.
\end{itemize}
{~}\\
\scalebox{0.65}{
\begin{tabular}{rrrrrrrr}\hline
$q^2 [\GeV^2]$ & $N_{\rm old}$ &  $N_{\rm new}$ & $N_{\rm common}$ & $N_{\rm old}^{\rm only}$ & $N_{\rm new}^{\rm only}$ & $N_{\rm common}/N_{\rm old} [\%]$ & $N_{\rm common}/N_{\rm old\,\cup\,new} [\%]$\\ \hline\hline
$[0.1, 2]$ & $147$ & $136$ & $101$ & $46$ & $35$ & $68.7$ & $55.5$\\
$[2, 4]$ & $89$ & $79$ & $59$ & $30$ & $20$ & $66.3$ & $54.1$\\
$[4, 6]$ & $100$ & $86$ & $60$ & $40$ & $26$ & $60.0$ & $47.6$\\
$[6, 8]$ & $143$ & $117$ & $92$ & $51$ & $25$ & $64.3$ & $54.8$\\
$(m_{\PJpsi}\pm0.05)^2$ & $95946$ & $95224$ & $74711$ & $21235$ & $20513$ & $77.9$ & $64.2$\\
$[11, 12.5]$ & $83$ & $94$ & $62$ & $21$ & $32$ & $74.75$ & $53.9$\\
$[15, 17]$ & $112$ & $121$ & $83$ & $29$ & $38$ & $74.1$ & $55.3$\\
$[17, 19]$ & $73$ & $84$ & $58$ & $15$ & $26$ & $79.5$ & $58.6$\\
\hline\end{tabular}
}
{~~}\\{~~}\\
Helicity angles in different RECO samples:\\
\begin{center}
\begin{columns}
\column{1.7in}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{aligned_withbdt/overlap_costhetak.pdf}
\column{1.7in}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{aligned_withbdt/overlap_costhetal.pdf}
\column{1.7in}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{aligned_withbdt/overlap_phi.pdf}

\end{columns}
\end{center}
}

\frame{
\frametitle{with BDT, $p_T>250\MeV$, background region}
\begin{itemize}
\item $p_T$ was inherit from  CommonParticles in S17, removed in S20.
\end{itemize}
{~}\\
\scalebox{0.65}{
\begin{tabular}{rrrrrrrr}\hline
$q^2 [\GeV^2]$ & $N_{\rm old}$ &  $N_{\rm new}$ & $N_{\rm common}$ & $N_{\rm old}^{\rm only}$ & $N_{\rm new}^{\rm only}$ & $N_{\rm common}/N_{\rm old} [\%]$ & $N_{\rm common}/N_{\rm old\,\cup\,new} [\%]$\\ \hline\hline
$[0.1, 2]$ & $31$ & $4$ & $2$ & $29$ & $2$ & $6.5$ & $6.1$\\
$[2, 4]$ & $46$ & $16$ & $8$ & $38$ & $8$ & $17.4$ & $14.8$\\
$[4, 6]$ & $34$ & $15$ & $4$ & $30$ & $11$ & $11.82$ & $8.9$\\
$[6, 8]$ & $29$ & $17$ & $7$ & $22$ & $10$ & $24.1$ & $17.9$\\
$(m_{\PJpsi}\pm0.05)^2$ & $1420$ & $1138$ & $522$ & $898$ & $616$ & $36.8$ & $25.6$\\
$[11, 12.5]$ & $31$ & $14$ & $9$ & $22$ & $5$ & $29.0$ & $25.0$\\
$[15, 17]$ & $25$ & $12$ & $5$ & $20$ & $7$ & $20.0$ & $15.6$\\
$[17, 19]$ & $25$ & $7$ & $1$ & $24$ & $6$ & $4.0$ & $3.2$\\
\hline\end{tabular}
}
}

\frame{
\frametitle{without BDT, $p_T>250~\MeV$, signal region}
\begin{itemize}
\item $p_T$ was inherit from  CommonParticles in S17, removed in S20.
\end{itemize}
{~}\\
\scalebox{0.65}{
\begin{tabular}{rrrrrrrr}\hline
$q^2 [\GeV^2]$ & $N_{\rm old}$ &  $N_{\rm new}$ & $N_{\rm common}$ & $N_{\rm old}^{\rm only}$ & $N_{\rm new}^{\rm only}$ & $N_{\rm common}/N_{\rm old} [\%]$ & $N_{\rm common}/N_{\rm old\,\cup\,new} [\%]$\\ \hline\hline
$[0.1, 2]$ & $147$ & $215$ & $113$ & $34$ & $102$ & $76.9$ & $45.4$\\
$[2, 4]$ & $89$ & $211$ & $70$ & $19$ & $141$ & $78.7$ & $30.4$\\
$[4, 6]$ & $100$ & $209$ & $71$ & $29$ & $138$ & $71.0$ & $29.8$\\
$[6, 8]$ & $143$ & $284$ & $109$ & $34$ & $175$ & $76.2$ & $34.3$\\
$(m_{\PJpsi}\pm0.05)^2$ & $95946$ & $110137$ & $80481$ & $15465$ & $29656$ & $83.9$ & $64.1$\\
$[11, 12.5]$ & $83$ & $209$ & $68$ & $15$ & $141$ & $81.9$ & $30.4$\\
$[15, 17]$ & $112$ & $268$ & $92$ & $20$ & $176$ & $82.1$ & $31.9$\\
$[17, 19]$ & $73$ & $187$ & $63$ & $10$ & $124$ & $86.3$ & $32.0$\\
\hline\end{tabular}
}
   \begin{itemize}
\item $q^2$ trend is worrying. Can suggests kinematic dependence?
\end{itemize}

Helicity angles in different RECO samples:\\
\begin{center}
\begin{columns}
\column{1.7in}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{aligned_withoutbdt/overlap_costhetak.pdf}
\column{1.7in}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{aligned_withoutbdt/overlap_costhetal.pdf}
\column{1.7in}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{aligned_withoutbdt/overlap_phi.pdf}

\end{columns}
\end{center}
}

\frame{
\frametitle{without BDT, $p_T>250~\MeV$, background region}
\begin{itemize}
\item $p_T$ was inherit from  CommonParticles in S17, removed in S20.
\end{itemize}
{~}\\
\scalebox{0.65}{
\begin{tabular}{rrrrrrrr}\hline
$q^2 [\GeV^2]$ & $N_{\rm old}$ &  $N_{\rm new}$ & $N_{\rm common}$ & $N_{\rm old}^{\rm only}$ & $N_{\rm new}^{\rm only}$ & $N_{\rm common}/N_{\rm old} [\%]$ & $N_{\rm common}/N_{\rm old\,\cup\,new} [\%]$\\ \hline\hline
$[0.1, 2]$ & $31$ & $233$ & $18$ & $13$ & $215$ & $58.1$ & $7.3$\\
$[2, 4]$ & $46$ & $295$ & $31$ & $15$ & $264$ & $67.4$ & $10.0$\\
$[4, 6]$ & $34$ & $294$ & $17$ & $17$ & $277$ & $50.0$ & $5.5$\\
$[6, 8]$ & $29$ & $344$ & $20$ & $9$ & $324$ & $69.0$ & $5.7$\\
$(m_{\PJpsi}\pm0.05)^2$ & $1420$ & $4037$ & $802$ & $618$ & $3235$ & $56.5$ & $17.2$\\
$[11, 12.5]$ & $31$ & $258$ & $20$ & $11$ & $238$ & $64.5$ & $7.4$\\
$[15, 17]$ & $25$ & $288$ & $15$ & $10$ & $273$ & $60.0$ & $5.0$\\
$[17, 19]$ & $25$ & $301$ & $12$ & $13$ & $289$ & $48.0$ & $3.8$\\
\hline\end{tabular}
  }}
	  
   	  
\begin{frame}
\frametitle{Kinematics comparison}
\begin{center}
    \includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{tom.png}
\end{center}
\begin{itemize}
\item Clear lack of high $p_T$ tracks in RECO 14
\item Still investigating.
\item Check, effects are independent of polarity.
\end{itemize}


\end{frame}  


   	  
   	  
   	   
      %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
   \section{MC driven studies}
  \begin{frame}
        \frametitle{MC comparison}
	       
         \begin{block}{Method 2: MC comparison}
         
		\begin{itemize}
\item Simulate MC for:$\PB \to \PKstar \mu \mu$ PHSP, $\PB \to \PKstar \mu \mu$ SM and $\PB \to \PKstar \PJpsi$\\
\item Using the same chain: Gauss $\to$ Boole $\to$ Moore
\item The same files are run through two different Brunel versions (one for RECO12 other for RECO14).
\item After this you have two sets of dsts that are easy to compare.
			\end{itemize}        
		%	{~}{~}Need to some how disentangle where the difference comes from.
  		 \end{block}
  \begin{columns}
  \column{0.1in}{~}
  \column{2.1in}
\begin{exampleblock}{Advantages}
  \begin{itemize}
  \item Clean way to compare(no backgrounds).
  \item Can check every step.
  \item No alignment of events problem.
  
    \end{itemize}

    		 \end{exampleblock}


  \column{2.1in}
  \begin{alertblock}{Disadvantages}
  \begin{itemize}
  \item Perfect detector alignment.
  \item DATA/MC difference.
  \item Need to repeat each step in 2011 analysis.
  \end{itemize}
    		 \end{alertblock}
  
  \end{columns}		 
  		 
  		 
  		 
   	   \end{frame}


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
  \begin{frame}
        \frametitle{MC Results $\PBzero \to \PKstar \PJpsi$}
\begin{columns}   
\column{0.in}{~} 

\column{2.3in} 		  		 
\begin{block}{MC}

    \includegraphics[width=0.84\textwidth]{B0_VRTXCHI2.png}\\
 \includegraphics[width=0.84\textwidth]{B0_MM.png}
\end{block}
\column{0.in}{~} 

\column{2.3in}
 \begin{block}{DATA}

    \includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{VTX2.png}\\
    \includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{mass.png}

\end{block}
\end{columns} 
   	   \end{frame}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
  \begin{frame}
        \frametitle{MC Results $\PBzero \to \PKstar \PJpsi$ RECO}
\begin{block}{Legend:}
$RY = $~ RECO Y.\\ No selection just truth matching.
\end{block}        
        \begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
Comparison(NEW vs OLD) & FOM & eff [\%] \\ \hline
R14 vs R12  & $ (OLD\&\&NEW)/(OLD\|NEW)$  & 90.1 \\ \hline
R14 vs R12  & $ (OLD\&\&NEW)/(OLD)$  & 95.0 \\ \hline
R14 vs R12  & $ (OLD\&\&NEW)/(NEW)$  & 94.6 \\ \hline 

\end{tabular}
\end{center}



   	   \end{frame}


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
  \begin{frame}
        \frametitle{MC Results $\PBzero \to \PKstar \PJpsi$}
\begin{block}{Legend:}
$SXRY = $~ Stripping X, RECO Y.
\end{block}        
        \begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
Comparison(NEW vs OLD) & FOM & eff [\%] \\ \hline
S20R14 vs S17R12  & $ (OLD\&\&NEW)/(OLD\|NEW)$  & 81.1 \\ \hline
S20R14 vs S17R12  & $ (OLD\&\&NEW)/(OLD)$  & 88.2 \\ \hline \hline

S20R14 vs S17R14  & $ (OLD\&\&NEW)/(OLD\|NEW)$  & 94.7 \\ \hline
S20R14 vs S17R14  & $ (OLD\&\&NEW)/(OLD)$  & 95.4 \\ \hline \hline

S17R14 vs S17R12  & $ (OLD\&\&NEW)/(OLD\|NEW)$  & 84.5 \\ \hline
S17R14 vs S17R12  & $ (OLD\&\&NEW)/(OLD)$  & 92.0 \\ \hline \hline

S20R12 vs S17R12  & $ (OLD\&\&NEW)/(OLD\|NEW)$  & 90.0 \\ \hline
S20R12 vs S17R12  & $ (OLD\&\&NEW)/(OLD)$  & 90.0 \\ \hline \hline

\end{tabular}
\end{center}



   	   \end{frame}





%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
  \begin{frame}
\frametitle{Summary}
\begin{itemize}
\item The overlap in data is about 64\% when we have the BDT applied and the cuts aligned. 
\item The BDTs contain different variables and do not select the same events. The overlap for the old sample increases from 78 to 84\% when turning off the BDT in the new sample. 
\item Without any selection, the MC predicts an overlap of 95\%. 

\end{itemize}


   	   \end{frame}
 %\section{Conclusions \& plans}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
  \begin{frame}
        \frametitle{Mille viae ducunt homines per sacula solutio}
  \begin{center}
   \includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{Diagram1.png}
\end{center}   
\begin{itemize}
\item We are getting closer. We need to match $88\%$ (MC) with $83\%$ (DATA).
\item To meet at common point we need to recover the old selection and BDT(work in progress).
\item $p_T$ mystery remains to be solved.
\item Applying an aligned selection (with no BDT), this comes down to 81\%. We know that there is not a complete correlation in e.g. IP $\chi^2$ between a track reconstructed in RECO 12 and 14, which explains this difference. 
\end{itemize}

\end{frame}

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{frame}
\frametitle{backups}

\begin{Huge}
Backup
\end{Huge}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Results/Plots $\PBzero$}
\begin{columns}
\column{2.5in}

\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/B0_DIRA.png}
\column{2.5in}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/B0_FD.png}
\end{columns}
\begin{columns}
\column{2.5in}

\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/B0_FDCHI2.png}
\column{2.5in}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/B0_IP.png}
\end{columns}

\end{frame}


\begin{frame}\frametitle{Results/Plots $\PBzero$}
\begin{columns}
\column{2.5in}

\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/B0_IPCHI2.png}
\column{2.5in}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/B0_MM.png}
\end{columns}
\begin{columns}
\column{2.5in}

\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/B0_P.png}
\column{2.5in}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/B0_PT.png}
\end{columns}

\end{frame}

\begin{frame}\frametitle{Results/Plots $\PBzero$}
\begin{columns}
\column{2.5in}

\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/B0_tau.png}
\column{2.5in}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/B0_VRTXCHI2.png}
\end{columns}

\end{frame}




\begin{frame}\frametitle{Results/Plots $\PK$}
\begin{columns}
\column{2.5in}

\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/K_P.png}
\column{2.5in}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/K_PT.png}
\end{columns}
\begin{columns}
\column{2.5in}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/K_TRK_CHI2.png}
\column{2.5in}
{~}
\end{columns}
\end{frame}


\begin{frame}\frametitle{Results/Plots $\Ppi$}
\begin{columns}
\column{2.5in}

\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/Pi_P.png}
\column{2.5in}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/Pi_PT.png}
\end{columns}
\begin{columns}
\column{2.5in}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/Pi_TRK_CHI2.png}
\column{2.5in}
{~}
\end{columns}
\end{frame}



\begin{frame}\frametitle{Results/Plots $\Pmuon$}
\begin{columns}
\column{2.5in}

\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/Mum_P.png}
\column{2.5in}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/Mum_PT.png}
\end{columns}
\begin{columns}
\column{2.5in}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/Mum_TRK_CHI2.png}
\column{2.5in}
{~}
\end{columns}
\end{frame}


\begin{frame}\frametitle{Results/Plots $\APmuon$}
\begin{columns}
\column{2.5in}

\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/Mup_P.png}
\column{2.5in}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/Mup_PT.png}
\end{columns}
\begin{columns}
\column{2.5in}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RECO/Mup_TRK_CHI2.png}
\column{2.5in}
{~}
\end{columns}
\end{frame}

      
\end{document}