Upload most recently semilepton analyser #117
Conversation
|
well done |
analysis/bin/slmassAnalyser.cc
Outdated
| if (had_dau2_pt[k] <0.5) continue; | ||
| if (std::fabs(had_angleXY[k]) <0.95) continue; | ||
| if (std::fabs(had_x[k]) >8) continue; | ||
| if (std::fabs(had_y[k]) >8) continue; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
sqrt(xx+yy) might be a better cut.
| tmp_jetDR = had_jetDR[k]; | ||
| if (had_jetDR[k] >0.3) continue; | ||
|
|
||
| tmp_legDR = had_legDR[k]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
are these tmp variables reset?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
no...I will add it
analysis/bin/slmassAnalyser.cc
Outdated
|
|
||
| } | ||
| //cout <<hadnum<<std::endl; | ||
| if (hadnum == 100001) return; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
have hadnum = -1 at the start and if hadnum < 0 return here
| int slmassAnalyser::SetCutValues(){ | ||
| topEventSelectionSL::SetCutValues(); | ||
|
|
||
| cut_ElectronPt = 34; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why is this different from topEventSelectionSL::SetCutValues? which is the top group sl recommended selection?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
BH and my cut is different
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don know.. I will ask BH when he comes
There was a problem hiding this comment.
here are my conditions. I marked items different from YB's
cut_ElectronPt = 35; // <<<<< DIFF >>>>> 34
cut_ElectronEta = 2.1;
cut_ElectronIDType = Electron_cutBased;
cut_ElectronIDCut = 4;
cut_ElectronSCEtaLower = 1.4442;
cut_ElectronSCEtaUpper = 10000000000; // <<<<< DIFF >>>>> 1.566
cut_ElectronRelIso03All = 0.0588; // <<<<< DIFF >>>>> 0.1
cut_MuonIDType = Muon_tightId;
cut_MuonPt = 26;
cut_MuonEta = 2.4;
cut_MuonRelIso04All = 0.06; // <<<<< DIFF >>>>> 0.15
cut_VetoElectronPt = 15;
cut_VetoElectronEta = 2.5; // <<<<< DIFF >>>>> 2.4
cut_VetoElectronIDType = Electron_cutBased;
cut_VetoElectronIDCut = 1;
cut_VetoElectronSCEtaLower = 1.4442;
cut_VetoElectronSCEtaUpper = 10000000000; // <<<<< DIFF >>>>> 1.566
cut_VetoElectronRelIso03All = 10485760; // <<<<< DIFF >>>>> 0.26
cut_VetoMuonIDType = NULL;
cut_VetoMuonPt = 10; // <<<<< DIFF >>>>> 15
cut_VetoMuonEta = 2.4;
cut_VetoMuonRelIso04All = 0.2; // <<<<< DIFF >>>>> 0.26
cut_JetID = 1;
cut_JetPt = 40; // <<<<< DIFF >>>>> 30
cut_JetEta = 4.7; // <<<<< DIFF >>>>> 2.4
cut_JetConeSizeOverlap = 0.4;
cut_BJetID = 1;
cut_BJetPt = 40; // <<<<< DIFF >>>>> 30
cut_BJetEta = 2.4;
cut_BJetConeSizeOverlap = 0.4;
cut_BJetTypeBTag = Jet_btagCMVA; // <<<<< DIFF >>>>> Jet_btag_CSVV2
cut_BJetBTagCut = 0.9432; // <<<<< DIFF >>>>> 0.8484
Also, I'm using an extra cut on jet pT; pT > 50 GeV if 2.7 < |eta| < 3.0, which is realized in overridden additionalConditionForJet().
Most of these cuts are given in AN-2017/056, which provides a basement of single top t-channel studies on Run II 2016 data (see TOP-17-023, TOP-17-011, TOP-17-012) with some tightened cuts for avoiding some issues (veto endcap electrons, pT > 50 GeV for jet in 2.7 < |eta| < 3.0; see p. 17-20 in AN-2017/276), following AN-2017/083. Also, for removing W+jets events more, the analysis in AN-2017/083 uses Jet_btagCMVA instead of Jet_btag_CSVV2.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I still don't understand why this is different from topEventSelectionSL. BH is doing singletop, so it should be different, but if these are the standard semileptonic cuts, it should be updated in topEventSelectionSL so we can all benefit (vts will look into the SL channel next year also). If its a special cut, then why is it different from the standard?
Analysis code. :)