\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}

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


\usetheme{Sybila} 

\title[Combining limits in LFV]{Tauola development}
\author{Marcin Chrz\k{a}szcz$^{1,2}$}
\institute{$^1$~University of Zurich,\\ $^2$~Institute of Nuclear Physics, Krakow}
\date{\today}
\begin{document}
% --------------------------- SLIDE --------------------------------------------
\frame[plain]{\titlepage}
\author{Marcin Chrz\k{a}szcz}
% ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% --------------------------- SLIDE --------------------------------------------

\institute{~(UZH, IFJ)}

\section{Introduction}


\begin{frame}\frametitle{Where are we?}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{TauLFV_UL_2013001.pdf}
\end{figure}




\end{frame}

\section{Start from simple frequentist }


\begin{frame}\frametitle{Where are we?}
\begin{itemize}
\item I started from simple FD
\item Ultimate goal is to combine it with Bayesian.
\item There are fiew tools on the market: RooStats, CLs(tom Junk), BAT, and more.
\item One worse then the other....
\item Decided: write own toy and check with RooStats(worse decision in my life).
\end{itemize}
Assumtions:
\begin{itemize}
\item Don't combine limits if there is an order of magnitude difference.
\item Don't take LHCb yet into account.
\end{itemize}



\end{frame}


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

\begin{frame}\frametitle{Results from FD}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{TauLFV_UL_2013001_MY.pdf}
\end{figure}

\end{frame}


\begin{frame}\frametitle{Results from FD}
\begin{itemize}
\item Don't trust fully this results.
\item With to many toys, RooStats is starting to get crazy.
\item Also with to large range for scanning the $Br$.
\item After 4 days of banning my head what this idiot does, I scheduled a meeting with an CMS expert.
\item With medium range and medium toys I am getting similar results to my toy model.
\item Also have feeling RooStats is not doing systematics correct...
\end{itemize}

\end{frame}



\begin{frame}\frametitle{TOY model}
\begin{itemize}
\item For given Br, for each experiment(Babar and Belle) in toy loop:
\begin{itemize}
\item Choose efficiency from Gaussian PDF: $\epsilon, \delta \epsilon$.
\item Choose Background accordingly to Gaussian PDF: $n_{bkg}, \delta n_{bkg}$.
\item Now we have $n_{bkg}$, and $n_{sig}$. The can now calculate the probability of two experiments(babar and belle) and multiply it in both cases fixing $n_{obs}$. 
\item After the toys we can calculate the mean probability is taken. 
\item Stop procedure when $mean<0.1$.
\end{itemize}
\item Resonable $0.1\times 10^{-8}$ agreement between this and FD in RooStats.
\item Bayesian calculator in RooStats gives correct results only assuming no background scenario...
\item Lots of understanding on the table.
\end{itemize}

\end{frame}



\begin{frame}\frametitle{Tauola follow up $\tau^{-} \to \mu^{-} \mu^{-} e^{+}$ }  
\begin{itemize}
\item In theory paper they presented explicite new models for $\tau \to 3\mu$ and $\tau \to \mu^{-} \mu^{+} e^{-}$.
\item After sleeping with this I thought it would be bad idea not to have them for remaining 4: $\tau \to \mu^{-} \mu^{-} e^{+}$,  $\tau \to 3e$, $\tau \to e^{-} e^{+} \mu^{-}$, $\tau \to e^{-} e^{-} \mu^{+}$
\item For $\tau \to 3e$ it's extremely easy to derive the operator from  $\tau \to 3\mu$ .
\item The same for: $\tau \to e^{-} e^{+} \mu^{-}$ from $\tau \to \mu^{-} \mu^{+} e^{-}$.
\item For the $\tau \mu^{-} \mu^{-} e^{+}$ and $\tau \to e^{-} e^{-} \mu^{+}$ required more dancing and talking to theorists. 
\item In the and there are only two operators(radiative ones don't exist for this decays).
\end{itemize}

\end{frame}

\begin{frame}\frametitle{Tauola follow up}

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{plots_tauola/LLLL_emumuSS.pdf}{~}{~}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{plots_tauola/LLRR_emumuSS.pdf}\\
\end{figure}
\begin{itemize}
\item Have all the modes :)
\item Can rest in peace from coding in FORTRAN.
\end{itemize}

\end{frame}





\end{document}