HM Update

HM Update

Hyeonjin KimEG1 meeting, Feb 27, 2008

HM status

• Reported strange chi2 distribution for high energy.

fixed it by new parameterization it didn’t help for low rejection issues. because photons in Hgg and JF17 has

mostly energy 30 to 150GeV

Efficiency vs. Rejection

pT > 25GeV pT > 40GeV

w/ TrkIso

No TrkIso

Hgg (misal) and JF17 (misal)

Efficiency and rejection

No TrkIso HM

(pT>25)

IsEM

(pT>25)

HM

(pT>40)

IsEM (pT>40)

Efficiency 83 0.003 83 0.003 85 0.003 86 0.003

Rejection 2364 101 5515 369 3038 317 4895 706

w/ TrkIso HM

(pT>25)

IsEM

(pT>25)

HM

(pT>40)

IsEM

(pT>40)

Efficiency 81 0.003 81 0.003 84 0.003 84 0.003

Rejection 4945306 8901 752 7054 1209 24186 5727

Comparison of rejection for v13 and v12

pT > 25GeV pT > 40GeV

v12

v13

Why low Rejection?• Check how powerful IsEM variables are • Check how many fake photon pass by each IsEM v

ariables IsEM : emax2, emax2-emin, wtot, weta1,f1, fracs

1,e233/e237, e237/e277, et4/pT HM: f1, fracs1, weta1, f0, f2, f3, f4, e233/e277, w

eta2, isol

Description of variables in IsEM not HM

• Wtots1: total width in em sampling1 in 20 strips.

• E2tsts1: 2nd maximum in strips.

• Emins1: energy of strip with minimum b/w max1 and max2

• Deltae = e2tsts1 – emins1

• Fr1 = e237/e277

• Fr2 = e233/e237

Cut Flow (JF17)

cut Nfake

HM 546

+ deltae 395

+emax2 353

+ wtot 295

+ fr1 & fr2 261(234)

HM + IsEM var cut

Cut Flow (Hgg)

cut Nfake

HM 13810(83%)

+ deltae 13589

+emax2 13510

+ wtot 13322

+ fr1 & fr2 13248(80%)

Correlation of HM variables with IsEM variables

1. correlation of HM variables which are not in IsEM (isol, f2,fr37,f3,f0) with IsEM variables

2. Correlation of deltae, emax2r and wtotsWith HM variables

Correlation b/w HM (only) & IsEM

del emax2 wtots1

isol 0.03 0.39 0.56

f2 -0.01 -0.38 -0.48

fr37 -0.05 -0.31 -0.27

f3 0.10 -0.15 -0.003

f0 0.05 0.49 0.68

weta2 f1 fracs1 weta1

0.51 0.69 0.80 0.65

-0.51 -0.91 -0.74 -0.70

-5.3 -0.47 -0.48 -0.38

-0.23 -0.54 -041 -0.44

0.77 0.53 0.86 0.70

Hgg

Correlation b/w IsEM (only) & HM variables

del emax2 wtots1f1 -0.03 0.30 0.3

weta1 -0.05 0.26 0.53fracs1 0.02 0.37 0.74

f4 0.04 0.02 -0.02weta2 0.08 0.39 0.08

isol 0.03 0.39 0.56

f2 -0.01 -0.38 -0.48

fr37 -0.05 -0.31 -0.27

f3 0.10 -0.15 -0.003

f0 0.05 0.49 0.68

Hgg

correlation b/w HM (only) & IsEM

del emax2 wtots1

isol 0.06 0.19 0.03

f2 -0.05 -0.13 -0.14

fr37 -0.17 -0.14 -0.02

f3 0.04 0.04 0.07

f0 0.06 0.19 0.02

weta2 f1 fracs1 weta1

0.35 0.36 0.43 0.28

0.23 -0,61 -0.23 -0.32

-0.39 -0.14 -0.16 -0.13

0.16 -0.35 0.33 -0.35

0.18 0.28 0.27 0.34

JF17

Correlation b/w IsEM (only) & HM variables

del emax2 wtots1f1 0.02 0.28 -0.09

weta1 -0.10 -0.07 0.04fracs1 0.02 0.22 0.06

f4 0.006 -0.0002 0.11weta2 0.22 0.23 0.222

isol 0.06 0.19 0.03f2 -0.05 -0.13 -0.14

fr37 -0.17 -0.14 -0.02f3 0.04 0.04 0.07f0 0.06 0.19 0.02

JF17

Correlation

• iso, fr37, f2, f3 & f0 are strongly correlated with other variables used by isEM

HM does not gain much advantage by using iso, fr37, f2, f3, f0.

• Emax2, deltae and wtots are weekly correlated with HM variables.

if HM use these variables it can get more information

HM variables Comparison b/w Hgg and single photon

• To check parameterization.• To check if single photon sample is good model

of photon in Hgg-------------------------------------------------------------------• Apply energy cut 1. 46 to 50GeV 2. 68 to 75GeV 3. 89 to 100GeV• And eta<0.2 cut

Hgg (ideal) and single photon (100GeV & ideal) single

Hgg

Hgg (ideal) and single photon (100GeV & ideal)

isol f4

• Curve : Mean values by parameterization• Red data points: Mean values from single photon samples• Balck data points : Mean values from Higgs in energy ,46 to 50GeV, 68 to 75GeV and 89 to 100GeV• eta < 0.2

weta2 f3

fr37f2

fracs1 f0

weta1f1

Eta < 0.2

0.6 <Eta <0.8f1 f2

isol

BACKUP

HM variables Comparison b/w Hgg and single photon

• Apply energy cut 1. 44 to 50GeV 2. 66 to 75GeV 3. 89 to 100GeV• Apply energy cut and eta<1.0 cut

HM Update

Documents

Transcript of HM Update