Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Reimplement Atlas Z0 8 TeV lowmass #2205

Open
wants to merge 12 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

comane
Copy link
Member

@comane comane commented Nov 9, 2024

Possible bugs were found in the old implementation:

  1. The overall multiplicative factor of the luminosity uncertainty given on hep-data (see https://www.hepdata.net/record/117854) is 1.8 %. In the old implementation 1.9 % was taken

-> I have incorporated this modification as it makes not a big difference

(this branch) https://vp.nnpdf.science/XpC1u8GqSyapV3e-ffvpwg==

(master) https://vp.nnpdf.science/7KddpIE6S9u2aBAfuTybkQ==

  1. In the old implementation Lumi uncertainty is assumed to be MULT UNCORR. I have noticed that setting the Lumi uncertainty to CORR the chi2 grows by an order of magnitude. I am not sure I understand this. Perhaps in this case Lumi is supposed to be UNCORR?

@Radonirinaunimi
Copy link
Member

Hi @comane, you need to run the regenerate-data bot to make the commondata test pass.

@comane comane force-pushed the reimplement_ATLAS_Z0_8TEV_LOWMASS branch from 2bd9a64 to 69a33a2 Compare December 7, 2024 18:58
Comment on lines +55 to +62

elif (sys[0]['name'] == 'ATLAS_LUMI') or (sys[0]['name'] == 'Lumi:M'):
error_definitions[sys[0]['name']] = {
"description": f"{sys[0]['name']}",
"treatment": "MULT",
"type": "UNCORR",
}

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

A possible bug here is that the LUMI in the legacy implementation was treated as UNCORR.
It should however be CORR (ATLASLUMI12). If I set it to CORR, however, the chi2 changes by an order of magnitude (see report)
Am I missing something here or is it genuine?

https://vp.nnpdf.science/X59c09ozTEmm9vwP3vYTRg==

@comane comane requested a review from t7phy December 8, 2024 12:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants