View pjs.ipynb
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
{
"cells": [
{
"cell_type": "code",
"execution_count": 1,
"metadata": {
"collapsed": true
},
"outputs": [],
"source": [
View lartemperature
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
 
## Propagation of temperature difference
 
$$E^\text{(corr)}_{\text{year}} = E_{\text{year}} / (1 + \alpha_{\text{year}})$$
 
we want
 
$$E^\text{(corr)}_{\text{2012}} = E^\text{(corr)}_{\text{2015}} $$
 
and we know (temperature effect):
View gist:a7bdc5768ed6f8fce170
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
{
"cells": [
{
"cell_type": "code",
"execution_count": 1,
"metadata": {
"collapsed": false
},
"outputs": [],
"source": [
View ftest
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
{
"cells": [
{
"cell_type": "markdown",
"metadata": {},
"source": [
"See as example https://indico.cern.ch/event/147827/material/slides/1?contribId=9, slide 16"
]
},
{
View chi2_problem
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
{
"metadata": {
"name": "",
"signature": "sha256:73fa0c55dc2c0975d9c2102088e87500ae209e8b36bf73fe3b3633d6fe405423"
},
"nbformat": 3,
"nbformat_minor": 0,
"worksheets": [
{
"cells": [
View chi2_problem_root
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
{
"metadata": {
"name": "",
"signature": "sha256:df7234a0e683ce8cb49122683b52f787f9f33e94bdd3a6bc8189dc167e0e2aee"
},
"nbformat": 3,
"nbformat_minor": 0,
"worksheets": [
{
"cells": [
View localgroupdisk
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
{
"metadata": {
"name": "",
"signature": "sha256:3e1c49c3c4e537695ae945cbf720250a7981031b9cf4e7037eba8a129208ef78"
},
"nbformat": 3,
"nbformat_minor": 0,
"worksheets": [
{
"cells": [
View background_ruggero
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Many shape analyses have the problem of parametrizing the background. Many approach have been used in the past and new ideas should be investigated, trying to define common recipe(s) taking into account that different analyses can have different needs.
 
It would be good to extend the discussion to ATLAS, for example inside the statistical forum, but the concern is that such approach, as experimented in the past, may not converge. So the idea is to start the discussion with few people working in some similar analyses ($\gamma\gamma$, $jj$, $\gamma j$, diboson, ...), to list the various possibilities and to evaluate the pro and the cons.
 
These analyses share a similar background distribution of the invariant mass (smooth, decreasing) with a large number of events and the search for a resonant signal.
 
Some functional forms have theoretical motivation, but the detector effects are not negligible, so in general it is not mandatory to use functional form that comes from theoretical arguments.
 
The main topics of
View background_ruggero
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Many shape analyses have the problem of parametrizing the background. Many approach have been used in the past and new ideas should be investigated, trying to define common recipe(s) taking into account that different analyses can have different needs.
 
It would be good to extend the discussion to ATLAS, for example inside the statistical forum, but the concern is that such approach, as experimented in the past, may not converge. So the idea is to start the discussion with few people working in some similar analyses ($\gamma\gamma$, $jj$, $\gamma j$, diboson, ...), to list the various possibilities and to evaluate the pro and the cons.
 
These analyses share a similar background distribution of the invariant mass (smooth, decreasing) with a large number of events and the search for a resonant signal.
 
Some functional forms have theoretical motivation, but the detector effects are not negligible, so in general it is not mandatory to use functional form that comes from theoretical arguments.
 
The main topics of
Something went wrong with that request. Please try again.