GitBucket
mchrzasz
- \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}
- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5
- \definecolor{mygreen}{cmyk}{0.82,0.11,1,0.25}
- \usetheme{Sybila}
- \title[Update on MoM]{Update on MoM}
- \author{Marcin Chrz\k{a}szcz$^{1}$, Nicola Serra$^{1}$}
- \institute{$^1$~University of Zurich}
- \date{\today}
- \begin{document}
- % --------------------------- SLIDE --------------------------------------------
- \frame[plain]{\titlepage}
- \author{Marcin Chrz\k{a}szcz{~}}
- \institute{(UZH)}
- % ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- % --------------------------- SLIDE --------------------------------------------
- \begin{frame}\frametitle{S-wave study}
- \begin{footnotesize}
- \begin{itemize}
- \item In rush for Moriond we observed that some $F_s$ pulls are a bit over covering.
- \item We had just limited number of toys so we stooped to investigate.
- \item With more toys the pulls slighty over cover, but the impact on the angular observables is negligible.
- \end{itemize}
- \begin{table}
- \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
- \hline
- Bin $[\GeV^2]$ & mean & sigma \\ \hline \hline
- $0.1 -0.98$ & $0.038 \pm 0.029$ & $0.918 \pm0.021$ \\ \hline
- $1.1 -2 $ & $-0.024 \pm 0.031$ & $0.998 \pm 0.022$ \\ \hline
- $2 - 3 $ & $-0.025 \pm 0.029$ & $0.942 \pm 0.021$ \\ \hline
- $3 - 4 $ & $-0.069 \pm 0.030$ & $0.971 \pm 0.022$ \\ \hline
- $4 - 5 $ & $0.062 \pm 0.030$ & $0.955 \pm 0.021$ \\ \hline
- $5 - 6 $ & $0.081 \pm 0.032$ & $0.992 \pm 0.022$ \\ \hline
- $6 - 7 $ & $-0.031 \pm 0.031$ & $0.992 \pm 0.022$ \\ \hline
- $7 - 8 $ & $-0.054 \pm 0.030$ & $0.962 \pm 0.021$ \\ \hline
- $11 - 11.75 $ & $0.002 \pm 0.030$ & $0.947 \pm 0.021$ \\ \hline
- $11.75 - 12.5 $ & $-0.027 \pm 0.031$ & $0.979 \pm 0.022$ \\ \hline
- $15 - 16 $ & $0.011 \pm 0.029$ & $0.933 \pm 0.021$ \\ \hline
- $16 - 17 $ & $0.02 \pm 0.029$ & $0.929 \pm 0.020$ \\ \hline
- $17 - 18 $ & $-0.054 \pm 0.030$ & $0.962 \pm 0.021$ \\ \hline
- %$18 - 19 $ & $ -0.075 \pm 0.030$ & $0.964 \pm 0.021$ \\ \hline
- \end{tabular}
- \end{table}
- \end{footnotesize}
- \end{frame}
- \begin{frame}\frametitle{Correlations between $\color{white}{S_x}$ and $\color{white}{A_x}$, MC Toys}
- \begin{small}
- \begin{itemize}
- \item We tested the correlation between the $S_i$ and CP different observables.
- \item In toys correlation is negligible.
- \end{itemize}
- \begin{table}
- \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
- \hline
- $q^2$ & $S_3~A_3$ & $S_4~A_4$& $S_5~A_5$& $S_6~A_6$& $S_7~A_7$& $S_8~A_8$& $S_9~A_9$ \\ \hline \hline
- $0$ & $0.049$ & $-0.066$ & $-0.001$ & $0.011$ & $-0.034$ & $0.015$ & $0.022$ \\ \hline
- $1$ & $0.029$ & $-0.047$ & $-0.003$ & $0.011$ & $-0.003$ & $0.017$ & $0.052$ \\
- \hline
- $2$ & $0.004$ & $-0.046$ & $0.026$ & $-0.022$ & $-0.010$ & $-0.036$ & $-0.032$ \\
- \hline
- $3$ & $0.079$ & $0.032$ & $0.035$ & $-0.028$ & $-0.025$ & $0.037$ & $0.027$ \\
- \hline
- $4$ & $-0.020$ & $0.074$ & $-0.001$ & $0.008$ & $-0.063$ & $-0.015$ & $0.037$ \\
- \hline
- $5$ & $-0.019$ & $-0.018$ & $-0.041$ & $0.001$ & $0.025$ & $0.015$ & $-0.014$ \\
- \hline
- $6$ & $0.000$ & $-0.008$ & $-0.021$ & $0.049$ & $-0.014$ & $-0.04$ & $-0.002$ \\ \hline
- $7$ & $0.000$ & $-0.008$ & $-0.021$ & $0.049$ & $-0.014$ & $-0.04$ & $-0.002$ \\ \hline
- $8$ & $-0.011$ & $-0.009$ & $-0.013$ & $-0.023$ & $0.047$ & $0.006$ & $-0.004$ \\
- \hline
- $9$ & $-0.009$ & $-0.015$ & $-0.008$ & $-0.009$ & $-0.010$ & $-0.050$ & $-0.029$ \\ \hline
- $10$ & $0.030$ & $0.023$ & $0.084$ & $-0.049$ & $0.030$ & $0.002$ & $0.021$ \\ \hline
- $11$ & $-0.016 $ & $0.006$ & $0.018$ & $-0.029$ & $0.034$ & $-0.049$ & $-0.039$ \\ \hline
- \hline
- \end{tabular}
- \end{table}
- \end{small}
- \end{frame}
- \begin{frame}\frametitle{Systematics}
- \begin{small}
- \begin{itemize}
- \item To access systematics due to unfolding procedure we use the higher($+2$) order acceptance correction function on high statistics MC.
- \item I noticed that some of the weights ($1/\epsilon$) are super large ($>100$) or even negative which creates larger systematics(shifts the mean a lot).
- \item Repeated this study rejecting this events, smaller systematics in both cases negligible.
- \end{itemize}
- \end{small}
- \begin{tiny}
- \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
- $q^2$ & $F_l$ & $S_3$ & $S_4$ & $S_5$ & $S_6$ & $S_7$ & $S_8$ & $S_9$ \\ \hline
- 0 & 0.0022 & 0.005 & 0.0003 & 0.0077 & 0.0066 & 0.0080 & 0.0002 & 0.0032 \\
- 1 & 0.0048 & 0.001 & 0.0014 & 0.0051 & 0.0088 & 0.0036 & 0.0048 & 0.0003 \\
- 2 & 0.0004 & 0.0001 & 0.00013 & 0.0056 & 0.0046 & 0.0014 & 0.0003 & 0.0022 \\
- 3 & 0.0002 & 0.0012 & 0.0007 & 0.0017 & 0.0001 & 0.0016 & 0.0011 & 0.0021 \\
- 4 & 0.002 & 0.0004 & 0.0005 & 0.0015 & 0.0003 & 0.0009 & 0.0002 & 0.0010 \\
- 5 & 0.006 & 0.0011 & 0.0007 & 0.0026 & 0.0014 & 0.0016 & 0.0015 & 0.0004 \\
- 6 & 0.008 & 0.0019 & 0.0008 & 0.0024 & 0.0029 & 0.0033 & 0.0019 & 0.0000 \\
- 7 & 0.0062 & 0.0015 & 0.0002 & 0.0011 & 0.0036 & 0.0028 & 0.0016 & 0.0005 \\
- 8 & 0.0035 & 0.0037 & 0.0017 & 0.0046 & 0.0037 & 0.0005 & 0.0040 & 0.0040 \\
- 9 & 0.005 & 0.0001 & 0.0004 & 0.0010 & 0.0009 & 0.0050 & 0.0043 & 0.0033 \\
- 10 & 0.0011 & 0.0044 & 0.002 & 0.0060 & 0.0059 & 0.0101 & 0.0000 & 0.0012 \\
- 11 & 0.0021 & 0.0018 & 0.0001 & 0.0020 & 0.0004 & 0.0052 & 0.0082 & 0.0059 \\
- \end{tabular}
- \end{tiny}
- \end{frame}
- \end{document}