100 likes | 196 Views
Categories for resolution study. Categories : eta , energy , number of primary vertices , conversion should be considered Eta : barrel – endcap ? or 4 bins like [0, 0.6] , [0.6, 1.37] , [1.52, 1.81] , [1.81, 2.37 ] ? Energy :
E N D
Categories for resolution study Categories : eta , energy , number of primary vertices , conversion should be considered Eta : barrel – endcap ? or 4 bins like [0, 0.6] , [0.6, 1.37] , [1.52, 1.81] , [1.81, 2.37] ? Energy : how to define the energy bins ?
Fraction of eta division Di-photon, tagging as leading andsub-leading 4 eta bins -- [0, 0.6] , [0.6, 1.37] , [1.52, 1.81] , [1.81, 2.37] barrel / endcap If upper limit of the new MC is around 1,000,000. barrel – endcap division might be a better choice Also, do we need to tag two photons as leading and subleading in eta category ?
conversion possibility in each eta bin Leading photon : subleading photon : Conversion for leading and subleading photon are more or less the same
Resolution parameter comparison categorized by eta Without smearing : With smearing : B + B means: leading photon in barrel and subleading photon in barrel
Resolution parameter comparison categorized by E (1) both of the two photons are in barrel low E low E smeared High E : E of leading Photon > 68 GeV , E of subleadingPhoton > 68 GeV Low E : E of leading Photon < 68 GeV , E of subleading Photon < 68 GeV High E High E smeared
Resolution parameter comparison categorized by E (2) both of the two photons are in barrel and unconverted low E low E smeared High E : E of leading Photon > 68 GeV , E of subleadingPhoton > 68 GeV Low E : E of leading Photon < 68 GeV , E of subleading Photon < 68 GeV High E High E smeared
next 1. Decide the categories of eta and energy ; 2. Any other category should be considered ? 3. Estimate the size of new MC asap
Resolution parameter comparison categorized by eta (2) Endcap + endcap is not precise enough smeared