D-Hadronic Analysis
| Mode | Default | EvtGen | PDL&DEC | EBeam | DEC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D0→ K- π+ | +0.1(+0.3σ) | +0.2(+0.4σ) | -0.1(-0.1σ) | +0.2(+0.4σ) | +0.4(+0.9σ) |
| D 0→ K+ π- | +0.3(+0.7σ) | +0.3(+0.6σ) | +0.1(+0.3σ) | -0.1(-0.2σ) | +0.1(+0.1σ) |
| D0→ K- π+ π0 | +0.5(+1.2σ) | -0.6(-1.6σ) | -0.4(-1.0σ) | +0.3(+0.8σ) | +0.4(+1.0σ) |
| D 0→ K+ π- π0 | +0.6(+1.4σ) | 0.0(+0.1σ) | -0.2(-0.5σ) | +0.3(+0.7σ) | +0.7(+1.7σ) |
| D0→ K- π+ π- π+ | +0.8(+1.7σ) | +1.0(+2.1σ) | +0.7(+1.5σ) | +0.6(+1.3σ) | +1.2(+2.6σ) |
| D 0→ K+ π- π+ π- | +0.2(+0.4σ) | -0.3(-0.6σ) | +0.1(+0.3σ) | 0.0(0.0σ) | +1.2(+2.5σ) |
| D+ → K- π+ π+ | -0.8(-1.6σ) | -1.2(-2.5σ) | -0.3(-0.6σ) | -0.2(-0.4σ) | -0.3(-0.7σ) |
| D- → K+ π- π- | +0.6(+1.3σ) | +0.3(+0.6σ) | -0.0(-0.1σ) | -0.3(-0.7σ) | +0.5(+1.0σ) |
| D+ → K- π+ π+ π0 | +1.8(+2.4σ) | +0.7(+0.9σ) | +1.1(+1.4σ) | +1.9(+2.6σ) | +1.0(+1.4σ) |
| D- → K+ π- π- π0 | -0.4(-0.5σ) | -0.3(-0.5σ) | +0.4(+0.5σ) | +2.3(+3.1σ) | +0.4(+0.6σ) |
| D+ → K0Sπ+ | 0.0(0.0σ) | +0.3(+0.5σ) | -0.2(-0.4σ) | -0.8(-1.5σ) | -0.5(-0.9σ) |
| D- → K0Sπ- | -1.0(-1.9σ) | +0.1(+0.3σ) | -1.2(-2.2σ) | -0.7(-1.4σ) | -0.7(-1.3σ) |
| D+ → K0Sπ+ π0 | +1.0(+1.1σ) | -1.2(-1.3σ) | +0.5(+0.6σ) | +1.2(+1.4σ) | -0.8(-0.9σ) |
| D- → K0Sπ- π0 | +2.7(+2.9σ) | +0.3(+0.3σ) | +1.2(+1.3σ) | +2.6(+2.8σ) | -0.5(-0.5σ) |
| D+ → K0Sπ+ π+ π- | +2.2(+2.4σ) | +1.7(+1.8σ) | +3.0(+3.2σ) | +1.4(+1.5σ) | +1.3(+1.4σ) |
| D- → K0Sπ- π- π+ | +1.9(+2.0σ) | +0.9(+0.9σ) | +1.1(+1.2σ) | +2.6(+2.8σ) | +1.6(+1.7σ) |
| D+ → K+ K- π+ | +0.3(+0.2σ) | +0.2(+0.2σ) | -1.4(-1.4σ) | -0.5(-0.4σ) | -0.2(-0.2σ) |
| D- → K- K+ π- | +0.6(+0.6σ) | +2.3(+2.2σ) | -0.5(-0.5σ) | +0.9(+0.9σ) | +0.9(+0.9σ) |
| χ2 | 40.68 | 26.58 | 27.21 | 45.11 | 30.79 |
| Mean | 0.80 ± 0.30 | 0.26 ± 0.29 | 0.19 ± 0.29 | 0.76 ± 0.33 | 0.62 ± 0.27 |
| Sigma | 1.26 ± 0.21 | 1.21 ± 0.20 | 1.22 ± 0.20 | 1.39 ± 0.24 | 1.16 ± 0.19 |
In this table, we compare the signal yields between the new release and original release(7.06). The new release consists of using the same line shape as data to fit signal MC (the 'Default'). Also changed the width of psi3770 from 0.0286 GeV to 0.0252 GeV, the mass of psi3770 from 3.7718 GeV to 3.7724 GeV, the Blatt-Weisskopf radius from 12.3 /GeV to 12.7 /GeV. In addition, the factor of "1/(1.0+(mr*p)*(mr*p))" had been removed in the fitting code.
The differences are in percentage with respect to the orignal one, and the meanings of the columns are listed below:
- Default
-
start from the original user decay file. Then we use
the CLEOG, MCPass2 with new release. Once we get the pass2 pds
file, then use the
HadronicDNtupleProccompiled in the new release to make the ntuple. We select DDbar with the same python script and then do the fit with RooFit compiled under new release. Used the modified lineshape and the fitting code as described above. - EvtGen
- use all of the original CLEOG constants, evt.pdl and DECAY.DEC file, only new EvtGen code.
- PDL&DEC
- use the original Particle Data listing evt.pdl and DECAY.DEC file
- EBeam
- use the original CLEOG constants, which has different Beam energy
- DEC
- use the original generic DECAY.DEC file
- Summary
-
If we take a look at the above table from another
perspective, i.e. by addting new elements one by one,
and then compare the χ2, we'll see a pattern.
Label New Elements χ2 EvtGen – – – 26.6 PDL&DEC EBeam – – 27.2 DEC EBeam PDL – 30.8 Default EBeam PDL DEC 40.7 EBeam – PDL DEC 45.1 From the above table, we can see that by adding new EBeam, and new evt.pdl, the difference is still quite small. However, once we use the new DECAY.DEC, we can't reproduce the original result. This indicate that the biggest problem lies in the change of the particle decay file.
dhad-3.0.16 table combine compare_yields_signal_7dot06_regular_all_new chisq gaus
Date: 2010-01-22 11:01:31 EST