100 likes | 231 Views
Update on the interplay between Trigger and Tagging. Stefano Villa, Universit é de Lausanne, July 21, 2003. Update (see talk on 30/06). LATEST VERSION OF TAGGING ( FlavourTagging v4r5 or v4r6 ). New channels, larger samples:
E N D
Update on the interplay between Trigger and Tagging Stefano Villa, Université de Lausanne, July 21, 2003 Stefano Villa Trigger and Tagging
Update (see talk on 30/06) • LATEST VERSION OF TAGGING (FlavourTagging v4r5 or v4r6). New channels, larger samples: • Bd→J/ (+-) KS (+-) 50k evts. (3317 selected) • Bd →+-263k evts. (15514 selected) • Bs →K+K- 298k evts. (27318 selected) rather obvious terminology: • TAG = event is tagged • L0 = event accepted by L0 • L1 = event accepted by L1 • SEL = event selected by offline phys. Selection • w = wrong tag fraction Stefano Villa Trigger and Tagging
Bd→+- : L1 eff. vs. MB retention on tagged events: on selected events: Stefano Villa Trigger and Tagging
Bd→+- Warning: different definition w.r.t. last time “Effective” efficiency Stefano Villa Trigger and Tagging
Bd→+- The third efficiency: TAG+L1 on SEL Stefano Villa Trigger and Tagging
Bd→J/(+-)Ks(+-) on tagged events: on selected events: Stefano Villa Trigger and Tagging
Bd→J/(+-)Ks(+-) Stefano Villa Trigger and Tagging
Bs→K+K- on tagged events: on selected events: Stefano Villa Trigger and Tagging
Bs→K+K- Stefano Villa Trigger and Tagging
Remarks • In all cases, L1-trigger is more efficient on tagged events than on selected events (up to about relative 10% at 4% MB retention). • L1 trigger+tagging effective efficiency seem to reach quite quickly a plateau, often well before the point corresponding to 4% MB retention. Stefano Villa Trigger and Tagging