D Had Log - January 2007

01/03/2007

Mode 1 fa vs. logL

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 1 —qsub job 77440 done.

Log file v0

STATUS=NOT POSDEF

Mode 1: 'kpi'

• Try to reset the initial value of fa and do the fit again

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 1 —qsub job 83325

Waiting on the queue

Hit fraction shrink to 60% in the Ntuple DT/MC

in mode 1:

index = 3, means 4 tracks, but only 3 tracks has trhitf info

Peter helped out. Revise the checkVetoes.

DHad.py yield trhitf 0.6 —qsub job 83401

DHad.py yield trhitf 0.7 —qsub job 83440

DHad.py yield trhitf 0.8 —qsub job 83441

DHad.py yield trhitf 0.9 —qsub job 83442

Write the APS apstract

message from AC:

• The topic category
  • F. PARTICLES AND FIELDS F4. Charm and Strange Quark Physics
• The author's (presenter's) name: Xin Shi
• An APS membership number: 61010157
• The abstract itself, in LaTeX: just the text body. TeX, ps

01/04/2007

Check the fits plotNll

• DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 1 —qsub job 83325

Log v1

/nfs/sge/root/default/spool/lnx1622/job_scripts/83325: line 18: 27263 Aborted /home/xs32/local/bin/DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 1

The plots still no minimum.

• Try one more time for initial value of f2= 0.2

Test quickly first, add protection for f2 not exceeding the limit

DHad.py fit fa fixALL plotNll -t d -m 1

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 1 —qsub job 85427 done. Log v2

• Mode 1: 'kpipi0'

• Determin the f2 limits and do the fit

  f2= 0.211 +/- 0.005 (0.206 - 0.216 ) Compare with the value from Signal MC: 0.196 +/- 0.036 (0.160 - 0.232), inside one sigma region.

  Choose 0.206 and 0.216 to fit

• Do the fit

  DHad.py fit fa 0.206 -m 1 —qsub job 85679

  DHad.py fit fa 0.216 -m 1 —qsub job 85680 done. Log

  There are some problem with the plot: Mode 1: 'kpipi0'

• Compare yields

  DHad.py table compare yields fa/0.216 cleo200609 -m 1

• Compare yields between fa 0.216 and cleo200609

Check the Hit fraction jobs

DHad.py yield trhitf 0.6 —qsub job 83401 Done. Log file

0.7, 0.8, 0.9 all done.

Fit for yields of hit fraction

DHad.py fit trhitf 0.6 —qsub job 85455 done. Log file

DHad.py fit trhitf 0.7 —qsub job 85456 Log file

DHad.py fit trhitf 0.8 —qsub job 85457 Log file

DHad.py fit trhitf 0.9 —qsub job 85458 Log file

01/05/2007

Plot the trhitf fits

Data:

DHad.py fit trhitf 0.6 : larger than 0.6 OK. DHad.py fit trhitf 0.7 : larger than 0.7 Mode 203: 'kspipi0' bad DHad.py fit trhitf 0.8 : larger than 0.8 OK. DHad.py fit trhitf 0.9 : larger than 0.9 OK.

Signal: trhitf OK

Generic: trkhitf : All mode 0 looks bad

• Better to seperate the d,s,g in the qsub job in the future. Easier for the logfile to display in the web.
• Check the logfiles and resubmit if needed

Make the comparison table

DHad.py table compare yields trhitf/0.6 cleo200609

DHad.py table compare yields trhitf/0.7 cleo200609

DHad.py table compare yields trhitf/0.8 cleo200609

DHad.py table compare yields trhitf/0.9 cleo200609

• Compare yields between trhitf 0.6 and cleo200609
• Compare yields between trhitf 0.7 and cleo200609
• Compare yields between trhitf 0.8 and cleo200609
• Compare yields between trhitf 0.9 and cleo200609

01/08/2007

mode to fix the p for - Mode exceedes the p limit 1.5

The limit of p is 0.1-1.5.

From the CBX(1.45), table 7 - single tag efficiencies in signal MC, the modes which exceeded the p limit are:

mode 0: kpi (1.50 +/- 0.27) mode 200: kpipi (1.50 +/- 0.14) mode 202: kspi (1.50 +/- 0.16)

Compared with the Data and Generic values of P:

modes	Data	Signal	Generic
0	0.28 +/- 0.05	1.50 +/- 0.27	1.00 +/- 0.13
200	0.60 +/- 0.04	1.50 +/- 0.14	0.69 +/- 0.01
202	0.61 +/- 0.07	1.50 +/- 0.16	0.84 +/- 0.05

• Question: Why background are low in these modes?

Fix the problem of sa+1 mode 203

Reproduce, and check the logfile:

DHad.py fit saplus -t d -m 203 —qsub log OK.

Resubmit all the sa+1 mode:

DHad.py fit saplus -t d —qsub Log

Find an error in the Roofit scripts:

scalep3.setVal(sp2); scalep3.setConstant(1);
               --- -> sp3

• Submit all the regular fits and see the differents

DHad.py fit cleo200701 -t s —qsub log

DHad.py fit cleo200701 -t d —qsub log

DHad.py fit cleo200701 -t g —qsub Log

Check the parameters in single and double tag fits

OK.

Compare the cleo200609 with the cleo200701

DHad.py table compare yields cleo200609 cleo200701

Compare yields between cleo200609 and cleo200701

Clarify the string method in the mbc_singletag_3s.C

test-DHad.py fit test -t s

01/09/2007

Clarify the string method in the mbc_singletag_3s.C

DHad.py fit test -t s Done.

Widede fit

DHad.py fit widede -t d —qsub log

DHad.py fit widede -t s —qsub log

NoFSR

DHad.py fit noFSR -t s —qsub log

Widede NoFSR

DHad.py fit widede noFSR -t s —qsub log

Gamma 0.0325

DHad.py fit Gamma 0.0325 -t d —qsub log

Gamma 0.0225

DHad.py fit Gamma 0.0225 -t d —qsub log

Gamma 0.027

DHad.py fit Gamma 0.027 -t d —qsub log

Gamma 0.02

DHad.py fit Gamma 0.02 -t d —qsub log

Gamma float

DHad.py fit Gamma float -t d —qsub log

R = 12.7

DHad.py fit R 12.7 -t d —qsub log

P = 0.5

Use decimal for p, test the result:

DHad.py fit P 0.5 -t s —qsub log

DHad.py fit P 0.5 -t d —qsub log

Posde

DHad.py fit posde -t d —qsub log

Negde

DHad.py fit negde -t d —qsub log

desideband low

DHad.py fit desidebandl -t d —qsub log

DHad.py fit desidebandl -t g —qsub log

desideband high

DHad.py fit desidebandh -t d —qsub log

DHad.py fit desidebandh -t g —qsub log

Fix p xi use desideband low

need to work at:

DHad.py fit p_xi_fixl -t d

Look at the plots of e9oe25 in mode1

DHad.py plot se9o25 -m 1 -t d

01/10/2007

Fix p xi use desideband low

DHad.py fit p_xi_fixl -t d —qsub log

DHad.py fit p_xi_fixl -t g —qsub log

Fix p xi use desideband high

DHad.py fit p_xi_fixh -t d —qsub log

DHad.py fit p_xi_fixh -t g —qsub log

Not use f 1b and s 1b for modes without pi 0

DHad.py fit Nopi0Fixfbsb -t d —qsub log

DHad.py fit Nopi0Fixfbsb -t s —qsub log

DHad.py fit Nopi0Fixfbsb -t g —qsub Log

Use fa plus one sigma

DHad.py fit faplus -t d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit faplus -t s —qsub Log

DHad.py fit faplus -t g —qsub Log

Use fa minus one sigma

DHad.py fit faminus -t d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit faminus -t s —qsub Log

DHad.py fit faminus -t g —qsub Log

Use sa plus one sigma

DHad.py fit saplus -t d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit saplus -t s —qsub Log

DHad.py fit saplus -t g —qsub Log

Use sa minus one sigma

DHad.py fit saminus -t d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit saminus -t s —qsub Log

DHad.py fit saminus -t g —qsub Log

| cos theta < 0.9|

DHad.py fit costh -t d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit costh -t s —qsub Log

DHad.py fit costh -t g —qsub Log

fa vs likelihood

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 0 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 1 —qsub Log

fa with varies values

DHad.py fit fa 0.182 -t d -m 0 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa 0.202 -t d -m 0 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa 0.216 -t d -m 1 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa 0.202 -t s -m 0 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa 0.216 -t s -m 1 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa 0.202 -t g -m 0 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa 0.216 -t g -m 1 —qsub Log

Trk Hit Fractions larger than 0.6

DHad.py fit trhitf 0.6 -t d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit trhitf 0.6 -t s —qsub Log

DHad.py fit trhitf 0.6 -t g —qsub Log

Trk Hit Fractions larger than 0.7

DHad.py fit trhitf 0.7 -t d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit trhitf 0.7 -t s —qsub Log

DHad.py fit trhitf 0.7 -t g —qsub Log

Trk Hit Fractions larger than 0.8

DHad.py fit trhitf 0.8 -t d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit trhitf 0.8 -t s —qsub Log

DHad.py fit trhitf 0.8 -t g —qsub Log

Trk Hit Fractions larger than 0.9

DHad.py fit trhitf 0.9 -t d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit trhitf 0.9 -t s —qsub Log

DHad.py fit trhitf 0.9 -t g —qsub Log

01/15/2007

Wrap up the checking of logL

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 0 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 1 —qsub Log

• fa vs. logL

01/17/2007

fa vs logL

• fa vs. logL Done.

Update the plots

• Problem pages: negde

Update the fit for the double tags

DHad.py fit cleo200701 -t d —tag d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit cleo200701 -t s —tag d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit cleo200701 -t g —tag d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit Gamma 0.0225 -t d —tag d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit Gamma 0.0325 -t d —tag d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit P 0.5 -t d —tag d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit noFSR -t s —tag d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit floatmass fitparams floatsigmaE diag -t s —tag d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit Nopi0Fixfbsb floatmass fitparams floatsigmaE diag -t s —tag d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit floatmass fitparams diag -t s —tag d —qsub Log

Update Table

Line shape parameters

DHad.py table line_shape_parameters fix_sigmaE

Need further coding.

01/18/2007

Confirm the fa vs logL

Resubmit the jobs and make sure f2 appears in the table, and no error message in the log.

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 0 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 1 —qsub Log

• Choose fa = 0.192, (nll = -981717.5732458052)

test-DHad.py fit fa 0.192 plotNll -t d -m 0

fa 0.1919770406 -0.0094170660 0.0095560280

01/19/2007

Confirm the fa vs logL

• Update log file
• Choose fa = 0.192, get NLL

DHad.py fit fa 0.192 getNll -t d -m 0 —qsub Log

• With more acurracy

fa = 0.1919770406

DHad.py fit fa 0.1919770406 getNll -t d -m 0 —qsub Log

The Nll = -981717.5730452490, from the plot, we have -981717.5732458052.

fa = 0.1825599746

DHad.py fit fa 0.1825599746 getNll -t d -m 0 —qsub Log

fa = 0.2015330686

DHad.py fit fa 0.2015330686 getNll -t d -m 0 —qsub Log

Nll(f2 fix) = -981717.5675454214

Nll(from plot) = -981717.5732458052

Create table comparing the D/D-bar

DHad.py table compare yields DDbar cleo200701

• Compare yields between D and Dbar
• Write up the process page Compare D and Dbar yields difference

01/21/2007

Update the plots of double tags

Done.

Update tables

DHad.py table line_shape_parameters

DHad.py table line_shape_parameters floatsigmaE

DHad.py table line_shape_parameters floatsigmaE Nopi0Fixfbsb

Fix p = 0.5 for signal MC in some modes

DHad.py fit cleo200701 -t s

01/22/2007

Fix p = 0.5 for signal MC in some modes

• Modes include:

0(Kpi), 200(Kpipi), 202(Kspi)

DHad.py fit cleo200701 -t s —qsub Log

• get the efficiency table ...

Redo p=0.5 for all

DHad.py fit P 0.5 -t d —qsub Log

DHad.py fit P 0.5 -t s —qsub Log

Update single tag table

DHad.py table double_signal_eff cleo200701

DHad.py table double_generic_eff cleo200701

DHad.py table double_data_gamma cleo200701

Resubmit the regular one

Now use the timestamp in the webpage. Get rid off the cleo200701. Use regular instead.

DHad.py fit regular -t d —qsub Log DHad.py fit regular -t s —qsub Log DHad.py fit regular -t g —qsub Log

DHad.py fit regular -t d —tag d —qsub Log DHad.py fit regular -t s —tag d —qsub Log DHad.py fit regular -t g —tag d —qsub Log

01/23/2007

Update tables

Double done.

Single:

DHad.py table single_signal_eff

Write up the process

Add cross checks in the fa vs. logL

p=0.5 plots log update

Done

01/24/2007

Improve the fa vs logL

Just draw the plot and out put the fa and logL values. Find out the curve func by other codes later.

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 0 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 1 —qsub Log

Typo in the logL -0.5

done

Add DDbar table errors

DHad.py table compare yields DDbar

done.

Update single tag table

DHad.py table noFSR_single_signal_eff

DHad.py table single_generic_eff

01/25/2007

Update single tag table

DHad.py table single_generic_eff

DHad.py table desidebandl_single_generic_eff

DHad.py table desidebandh_single_generic_eff

DHad.py table compare regular_desideband_low_high

DHad.py table single_data_gamma

DHad.py table single_widede

DHad.py table single_fix_p

Zoom in the -log(L) value

Mode 0 : fa (0.137 - 0.227) Mode 1 : fa (0.160 - 0.230)

Choose fa : 0.10 - 0.25

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 0 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 1 —qsub Log

01/26/2007

fa vs logL

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 0 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 1 —qsub Log

Hit fraction summary

• Hit fraction

mbc pi0 summary

• mBC for pi0

Put DDbar table in CBX

done.

01/27/2007

fa vs logL

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 0 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 1 —qsub Log

DDbar table change

Use Dbar-D in order to make the K+ - K- with in convention.

D0 to K- pi+

01/28/2007

fa vs. logL

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 0 —qsub Log

Change the range to 0.125 - 0.425

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 0 —qsub Log

01/29/2007

fa vs. logL

For mode 0, we found 0.13 and 0.38 for fa. Do the fit.

DHad.py fit fa 0.13 -t d -m 0 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa 0.13 -t s -m 0 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa 0.13 -t g -m 0 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa 0.38 -t d -m 0 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa 0.38 -t s -m 0 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa 0.38 -t g -m 0 —qsub Log

For mode 1:

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 1 —qsub Log

• Compare the yields

DHad.py table compare yields fa/0.13 -m 0

DHad.py table compare yields fa/0.38 -m 0

mBC pi0

• deltaE distribution in DT and MC

DHad.py plot deltaE -t s -m 1

DHad.py plot deltaE -t d -m 1 —qsub Log

DHad.py plot deltaE -t g -m 1 —qsub Log

01/30/2007

Write up mBC pi0

• Plot the 1.005 signal MC

• Check the normal first

DHad.py plot deltaE calc -t s -m 1 —qsub Log

delta E

Mean = -0.00426, consistent with the normal one.

• Times the factor 1.005 on the pi0's momentum

DHad.py plot deltaE calc pi0 1.005 -t s -m 1 —qsub Log

• Try factor 0.995,0.996, 0.997, 0.998 on the pi0's momentum

DHad.py plot deltaE calc pi0 0.995 -t s -m 1 —qsub Log

DHad.py plot deltaE calc pi0 0.996 -t s -m 1 —qsub Log

DHad.py plot deltaE calc pi0 0.997 -t s -m 1 —qsub Log

DHad.py plot deltaE calc pi0 0.998 -t s -m 1 —qsub Log

Comparing with data's mean value -0.0056, the closest one from 0.997 is -0.5506.

• plot mbc

DHad.py plot mbc -t s -m 1 —qsub Log

DHad.py plot mbc calc -t s -m 1 —qsub Log

DHad.py plot mbc calc pi0 0.997 -t s -m 1 —qsub Log

fa vs logL

DHad.py table compare yields fa/0.13 -m 0

DHad.py table compare yields fa/0.38 -m 0

01/31/2007

mbc plots

DHad.py plot mbc diff calc pi0 0.997 -t s -m 1 —qsub Log

DHad.py plot mbc diff calc -t s -m 1 —qsub Log

DHad.py plot mbc calc pi0 1.005 -t s -m 1 —qsub Log

DHad.py plot mbc diff calc pi0 1.005 -t s -m 1 —qsub Log

get the yields from 0.997

DHad.py yield mbc calc pi0 0.997 -t s -m 1 —qsub Log

Do the fit for 0.997

DHad.py fit mbc calc pi0 0.997 -t s -m 1 —qsub Log

Compare the output

DHad.py table compare output mbc/calc/pi0/0.997 -t s -m 1

Compare output between mbc_calc_pi0_0.997 and regular

fa vs logL mode 1

• Change range of fa from 0.18 to 0.26

DHad.py fit fa plotNll -t d -m 1 —qsub Log

fa for data can be extracted from the plot as from 0.19 to 0.24

• Do the fit for fa = 0.19 and 0.24

DHad.py fit fa 0.19 -t d -m 1 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa 0.19 -t s -m 1 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa 0.19 -t g -m 1 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa 0.24 -t d -m 1 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa 0.24 -t s -m 1 —qsub Log

DHad.py fit fa 0.24 -t g -m 1 —qsub Log

DHad.py table compare yields fa/0.19 -m 1

DHad.py table compare yields fa/0.24 -m 1