Annotation of ttbar/p20_taujets_note/b_and_tau.tex, revision 1.1
1.1 ! uid12904 1: \newpage
! 2: \section{\label{sub:Results-of-the}\boldmath$b$ and \boldmath$\tau$ selections}
! 3:
! 4: In the next step we applied the requirements of tight $\tau$- and $b$-tagging.
! 5: Table \ref{cap:btaggingandtau} shows the selection criteria that
! 6: we applied to data and MC. The b-tag operating point used was TIGHT, which corresponds
! 7: to NNbtag $>$ 0.775. We chose the $\tau$ with the highest $NN_{\tau}$ as \textit{the} $\tau$ candidate.
! 8: At this stage of the analysis we separated the events dataset we deal with into parts,
! 9: according to which type of $\tau$ the candidate with highest NN belongs.
! 10: This was done primarily to separate the type 3 tau events (which are
! 11: expected to have much higher fake rate and thus weaker $\ttbar$ cross section result) from the
! 12: type 2 events. The separate measurement channels were later combined to get the final result
! 13: (Section \ref{sub:xsect}). In principle, types 1 and 2 should be separated as well
! 14: but as there exists a considerable
! 15: cross-migration between them \cite{tau-id} and type 1 is a small fraction of
! 16: the total (10\% of type 1, 54.5\% of type 2 and 35.5\% of type 3), they were taken togetther in this analysis.
! 17: The topological NN used to enhance the signal content is described in section \ref{sub:NN-variables} .
! 18:
! 19: %Table \ref{b and tau type 3} shows the same efficiencies for
! 20: %type 3. We see that for type 3 $\tau$ candidates (which are more jet-like then other types) twice more
! 21: %candidate events are selected due to high $\tau$ fake rate.
! 22:
! 23:
! 24: At this point, we used these ID algorithms to define 3 mutually exclusive and
! 25: exhastive subsamples out of the original preselected data sample:
! 26:
! 27: \begin{itemize}
! 28: \item The {}``non-$b$ veto'' or {}``signal'' sample - the $\tau$ candidate has $NN_{\tau}>0.90$ ($NN_{\tau}$ denotes the NN cut commonly applied to all taus)
! 29: for taus types 1 and 2 and $NN(\tau)>0.95$ for taus type 3, and at least one NN b-tag (as in Table \ref{cap:btaggingandtau}).
! 30: These $NN(\tau)$ cuts were chosen based on previous studies involving hadronic decays of taus \cite{tes,higgs_tau}.
! 31: This is the sample used to extract the cross section. Jets matched to $\tau$ candidates are not $b$-tagged,
! 32: althought they still count as jets.
! 33: \item The {}``$\tau$ veto sample'' or ``loose-tight $\tau$ sample'' - Same selection, but with
! 34: $0.3<NN_{\tau}<0.7$ for all taus. $\tau$ NN lower cut of 0.3
! 35: instead of 0.0 was chosen to bias their jet properties closer to those of tight tau candidates,
! 36: in particular, so they have narrow showers. The upper cut is at 0.7 and not 0.95 or 0.90 to reduce signal contamination.
! 37: In this sample, 1400000 events were used for NN training for taus type 1 and 2 and 600000 events were used
! 38: in the case of type 3 taus. In both cases, the rest of the samples served as QCD template.
! 39: \item The {}``$b$ veto'' sample - Require exactly 0 tight $b$-tags. This is
! 40: the control sample used to verify the validity of the QCD modelling method. The b veto requirement
! 41: implies this sample is almost purely background.
! 42: \end{itemize}
! 43: %
! 44:
! 45: Along with the $NN_{\tau}$
! 46: cut described above, we also applied the cut NNelec $>$ 0.9 only
! 47: to type 2 taus since these are more likely to be faked by electrons. The cut NNelec $>$ 0.9 was chosen in
! 48: order to match the lowest cut of $NN_{\tau}$ $>$ 0.9 applied to type 2 taus (Section \ref{sub:Results-of-the}).
! 49:
! 50: As both b and $\tau$ ID is the step immediately after the preselection, the number of events available is
! 51: 2800000 million events. As explained above 1400000 events were used for taus type 1 and 2 NN training
! 52: and 600000 for type 3 taus NN training. Thus, there are 1400000 events available in each sample for the
! 53: measurement in the case of types 1 and 2 and 2200000 in the case of type 3. Details on NN training are given
! 54: in Section \ref{sub:NN-variables}.
! 55:
! 56:
! 57: The QCD modelling method used here is the same as used in p17 and is described in Section IXA of \cite{p17_note}.
! 58:
! 59: The final number of events in each channel for both signal and $b$ veto samples is shown
! 60: on Tables \ref{b_and_tau_type1_2}, \ref{b_and_tau_type_3}, \ref{bveto_type1_2} and \ref{b_veto_type_3}
! 61: (only statistical uncertainties are shown).
! 62:
! 63: As important as determining the subsamples to be used in this analysis, a determination as precise as possible
! 64: of both signal and electroweak contamination in the ``loose-tight $\tau$ sample'' had be done in order to
! 65: know whether this sample is totally QCD dominated or not.
! 66: Numbers showing the composition of such sample are shown on Tables \ref{loosetight1_2} and \ref{loosetight_3}
! 67: with their respective statistical uncertainties. From the $t\bar{t}$ content in each case we are able
! 68: estimate the signal contamination in the loose-tight sample. Such contaminations are 5.4\%
! 69: and 3.0\% for taus type 1 and 2 and type 3 respectively when a cross section of 7.46 pb is assumed
! 70: (Section \ref{sub:mcsample}). Likewise we see that electroweak contaminations
! 71: are 2.2\% and 0.9\%. As this is the sample used to model the QCD background
! 72: both signal and electroweak contaminations were taken into account when measuring the
! 73: cross section in Section \ref{sub:xsect}.
! 74:
! 75:
! 76: \begin{table}[h]
! 77: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
! 78: \hline
! 79: &
! 80: {\scriptsize data}&
! 81: {\scriptsize taggingMC}\\
! 82: &
! 83: {\scriptsize $\geq1$ $\tau$ with $|\eta|<2.5$ and $p_{T}>20$ GeV}&
! 84: {\scriptsize $\geq1$ $\tau$ with $|\eta|<2.5$ and $p_{T}>20$ GeV}\\
! 85: &
! 86: {\scriptsize $\geq1$ NN b-tag}&
! 87: {\scriptsize $mcweight \cdot TrigWeight \cdot bTagProb \cdot lumiReWeight \cdot PVzReWeight \cdot bFragWeight$ }\\
! 88: &
! 89: {\scriptsize }&
! 90: %{\scriptsize $\cdot WZPtReweight \cdot tau$\_$nnout$\_$corr$\_$p20 \cdot tau$\_$track$\_$corr$\_$p20$ }\\
! 91: {\scriptsize $\cdot WZPtReweight $ }\\
! 92: &
! 93: {\scriptsize $\geq4$ jets with $|\eta|<2.5$ and $p_{T}>20$ GeV}&
! 94: {\scriptsize $\geq4$ jets with $|\eta|<2.5$ and $p_{T}>20$ GeV}\\
! 95: \end{tabular}
! 96: \caption{$b$-tagging and $\tau$ ID. In the MC, we use the $b$-tagging certified
! 97: parameterization rather than actual $b$-tagging, that is, we applied the
! 98: $b$-tagging weight. We also used the triggering weight
! 99: as computed by the trigger efficiency parameterization as well as luminosity profile and $PV_Z$ reweighting weights. $
! 100: mcweight$ is the MC normalization factors (to luminosity), which are different for MC
! 101: samples with different parton multiplicities in ALPGEN MC samples.}%\end{ruledtabular}
! 102: \label{cap:btaggingandtau}
! 103: \end{table}
! 104:
! 105:
! 106:
! 107: %
! 108: \begin{table}[h]
! 109: %\begin{ruledtabular}
! 110: \begin{tabular}{cccc}
! 111: \hline
! 112: Sample & &
! 113: \# events\\
! 114: \hline
! 115: data&
! 116: &
! 117: 386\\
! 118: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow\tau+jets$&
! 119: &
! 120: 48.03 $\pm$ 0.53&\\
! 121: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow e+jets$&
! 122: &
! 123: 25.57 $\pm$ 0.36&\\
! 124: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow\mu+jets$&
! 125: &
! 126: 3.21 $\pm$ 0.14&\\
! 127: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow l+l$&
! 128: &
! 129: 4.01 $\pm$ 0.07&\\
! 130: $Wbb+jets\rightarrow$ $l\nu+bb+jets$&
! 131: &
! 132: 7.48 $\pm$ 0.30\\
! 133: $Wcc+jets\rightarrow$ $l\nu+cc+jets$&
! 134: &
! 135: 4.68 $\pm$ 0.17\\
! 136: $Wjj+jets\rightarrow$ $l\nu+jj+jets$&
! 137: &
! 138: 5.66 $\pm$ 0.11 \\
! 139: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $\tau\tau+bb+jets$&
! 140: &
! 141: 0.93 $\pm$ 0.08\\
! 142: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $\tau\tau+cc+jets$&
! 143: &
! 144: 0.51 $\pm$ 0.04\\
! 145: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $\tau\tau+jj+jets$&
! 146: &
! 147: 1.07 $\pm$ 0.10 \\
! 148: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $ee+bb+jets$&
! 149: &
! 150: 0.03 $\pm$ 0.01\\
! 151: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $ee+cc+jets$&
! 152: &
! 153: 0.00 $\pm$ 0.00\\
! 154: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $ee+jj+jets$&
! 155: &
! 156: 0.02 $\pm$ 0.01 \\
! 157: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $\mu\mu+bb+jets$&
! 158: &
! 159: 0.07 $\pm$ 0.02\\
! 160: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $\mu\mu+cc+jets$&
! 161: &
! 162: 0.02 $\pm$ 0.01\\
! 163: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $\mu\mu+jj+jets$&
! 164: &
! 165: 0.01 $\pm$ 0.01 \\
! 166: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $\nu\nu+bb+jets$&
! 167: &
! 168: 0.08 $\pm$ 0.03\\
! 169: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $\nu\nu+cc+jets$&
! 170: &
! 171: 0.00 $\pm$ 0.00\\
! 172: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $\nu\nu+jj+jets$&
! 173: &
! 174: 0.04 $\pm$ 0.01\\ \hline
! 175: \end{tabular}
! 176: \caption{Final number of events in each channel for taus types 1 and 2 $\tau$ after b-tagging, $\tau$ ID and trigger
! 177: in the signal sample when the assumed cross section is 7.46 pb. An estimate of QCD background is not included.}
! 178: %\end{ruledtabular}
! 179: \label{b_and_tau_type1_2}
! 180: \end{table}
! 181: %
! 182:
! 183: %\clearpage
! 184:
! 185: \begin{table}[t]
! 186: %\begin{ruledtabular}
! 187: \begin{tabular}{cccc}
! 188: \hline
! 189: Sample & &
! 190: \# of events\\
! 191: \hline
! 192: data&
! 193: &
! 194: 459\\
! 195: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow\tau+jets$&
! 196: &
! 197: 25.88 $\pm$ 0.39&\\
! 198: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow e+jets$&
! 199: &
! 200: 4.35 $\pm$ 0.16&\\
! 201: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow\mu+jets$&
! 202: &
! 203: 3.43 $\pm$ 0.14&\\
! 204: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow l+l$&
! 205: &
! 206: 2.80 $\pm$ 0.06&\\
! 207: $Wbb+jets\rightarrow$ $l\nu+bb+jets$&
! 208: &
! 209: 3.92 $\pm$ 0.17\\
! 210: $Wcc+jets\rightarrow$ $l\nu+cc+jets$&
! 211: &
! 212: 3.26 $\pm$ 0.15\\
! 213: $Wjj+jets\rightarrow$ $l\nu+jj+jets$&
! 214: &
! 215: 4.08 $\pm$ 0.11\\
! 216: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $\tau\tau+bb+jets$&
! 217: &
! 218: 0.74 $\pm$ 0.07\\
! 219: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $\tau\tau+cc+jets$&
! 220: &
! 221: 0.41 $\pm$ 0.03\\
! 222: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $\tau\tau+jj+jets$&
! 223: &
! 224: 0.80 $\pm$ 0.10 \\
! 225: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $ee+bb+jets$&
! 226: &
! 227: 0.00 $\pm$ 0.00\\
! 228: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $ee+cc+jets$&
! 229: &
! 230: 0.01 $\pm$ 0.01\\
! 231: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $ee+jj+jets$&
! 232: &
! 233: 0.01 $\pm$ 0.01 \\
! 234: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $\mu\mu+bb+jets$&
! 235: &
! 236: 0.04 $\pm$ 0.02\\
! 237: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $\mu\mu+cc+jets$&
! 238: &
! 239: 0.01 $\pm$ 0.01\\
! 240: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $\mu\mu+jj+jets$&
! 241: &
! 242: 0.00 $\pm$ 0.00 \\
! 243: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $\nu\nu+bb+jets$&
! 244: &
! 245: 0.12 $\pm$ 0.04\\
! 246: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $\nu\nu+cc+jets$&
! 247: &
! 248: 0.19 $\pm$ 0.04\\
! 249: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $\nu\nu+jj+jets$&
! 250: &
! 251: 0.06 $\pm$ 0.01 \\ \hline
! 252: \end{tabular}
! 253: \caption{Final number of events in each channel for taus type 3 $\tau$ After b-tagging, $\tau$ ID and trigger
! 254: in the signal sample when the assumed cross section is 7.46 pb. An estimate of QCD background is not included.}%\end{ruledtabular}
! 255: \label{b_and_tau_type_3}
! 256: \end{table}
! 257:
! 258: \newpage
! 259:
! 260: \begin{table}[t]
! 261: %\begin{ruledtabular}
! 262: \begin{tabular}{cccc}
! 263: \hline
! 264: Sample & &
! 265: \# of events\\
! 266: \hline
! 267: data&
! 268: &
! 269: 2494 \\
! 270: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow\tau+jets$&
! 271: &
! 272: 33.57 $\pm$ 0.34\\
! 273: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow e+jets$&
! 274: &
! 275: 15.67 $\pm$ 0.23&\\
! 276: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow\mu+jets$&
! 277: &
! 278: 2.30 $\pm$ 0.09&\\
! 279: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow l+l$&
! 280: &
! 281: 2.69 $\pm$ 0.04&\\
! 282: $Wbb+jets\rightarrow$ $l\nu+bb+jets$&
! 283: &
! 284: 9.29 $\pm$ 0.27\\
! 285: $Wcc+jets\rightarrow$ $l\nu+cc+jets$&
! 286: &
! 287: 31.63 $\pm$ 0.90\\
! 288: $Wjj+jets\rightarrow$ $l\nu+jj+jets$&
! 289: &
! 290: 169.95 $\pm$ 2.68\\
! 291: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $\tau\tau+bb+jets$&
! 292: &
! 293: 1.30 $\pm$ 0.11\\
! 294: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $\tau\tau+cc+jets$&
! 295: &
! 296: 3.15 $\pm$ 0.20\\
! 297: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $\tau\tau+jj+jets$&
! 298: &
! 299: 16.86 $\pm$ 1.14 \\
! 300: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $ee+bb+jets$&
! 301: &
! 302: 0.02 $\pm$ 0.01\\
! 303: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $ee+cc+jets$&
! 304: &
! 305: 0.00 $\pm$ 0.00\\
! 306: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $ee+jj+jets$&
! 307: &
! 308: 0.74 $\pm$ 0.33 \\
! 309: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $\mu\mu+bb+jets$&
! 310: &
! 311: 0.08 $\pm$ 0.02\\
! 312: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $\mu\mu+cc+jets$&
! 313: &
! 314: 0.07 $\pm$ 0.03\\
! 315: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $\mu\mu+jj+jets$&
! 316: &
! 317: 0.38 $\pm$ 0.22 \\
! 318: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $\nu\nu+bb+jets$&
! 319: &
! 320: 0.10 $\pm$ 0.03\\
! 321: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $\nu\nu+cc+jets$&
! 322: &
! 323: 0.00 $\pm$ 0.00\\
! 324: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $\nu\nu+jj+jets$&
! 325: &
! 326: 1.36 $\pm$ 0.49 \\ \hline
! 327: \end{tabular}
! 328: \caption{$b$-veto data set composition for types 1 and 2 $\tau$ when the assumed cross section is 7.46 pb.}%\end{ruledtabular}
! 329: \label{bveto_type1_2}
! 330: \end{table}
! 331:
! 332: %\clearpage
! 333:
! 334: \begin{table}[t]
! 335: %\begin{ruledtabular}
! 336: \begin{tabular}{cccc}
! 337: \hline
! 338: Sample & &
! 339: \# of events\\
! 340: \hline
! 341: data&
! 342: &
! 343: 3688 \\
! 344: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow\tau+jets$&
! 345: &
! 346: 19.85 $\pm$ 0.27\\
! 347: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow e+jets$&
! 348: &
! 349: 3.53 $\pm$ 0.13\\
! 350: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow\mu+jets$&
! 351: &
! 352: 2.80 $\pm$ 0.10\\
! 353: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow l+l$&
! 354: &
! 355: 1.81 $\pm$ 0.03\\
! 356: $Wbb+jets\rightarrow$ $l\nu+bb+jets$&
! 357: &
! 358: 5.26 $\pm$ 0.19\\
! 359: $Wcc+jets\rightarrow$ $l\nu+cc+jets$&
! 360: &
! 361: 22.43 $\pm$ 0.80\\
! 362: $Wjj+jets\rightarrow$ $l\nu+jj+jets$&
! 363: &
! 364: 126.41 $\pm$ 2.60 \\
! 365: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $\tau\tau+bb+jets$&
! 366: &
! 367: 0.92 $\pm$ 0.09\\
! 368: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $\tau\tau+cc+jets$&
! 369: &
! 370: 2.86 $\pm$ 0.20\\
! 371: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $\tau\tau+jj+jets$&
! 372: &
! 373: 14.53 $\pm$ 1.15 \\
! 374: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $ee+bb+jets$&
! 375: &
! 376: 0.00 $\pm$ 0.00\\
! 377: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $ee+cc+jets$&
! 378: &
! 379: 0.08 $\pm$ 0.04\\
! 380: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $ee+jj+jets$&
! 381: &
! 382: 0.31 $\pm$ 0.18 \\
! 383: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $\mu\mu+bb+jets$&
! 384: &
! 385: 0.04 $\pm$ 0.02\\
! 386: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $\mu\mu+cc+jets$&
! 387: &
! 388: 0.05 $\pm$ 0.02\\
! 389: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $\mu\mu+jj+jets$&
! 390: &
! 391: 0.05 $\pm$ 0.04 \\
! 392: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $\nu\nu+bb+jets$&
! 393: &
! 394: 0.16 $\pm$ 0.05\\
! 395: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $\nu\nu+cc+jets$&
! 396: &
! 397: 0.83 $\pm$ 0.15\\
! 398: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $\nu\nu+jj+jets$&
! 399: &
! 400: 2.31 $\pm$ 0.46 \\ \hline
! 401: \end{tabular}
! 402: %\end{ruledtabular}
! 403: \caption{$b$-veto data set composition for type 3 $\tau$ when the assumed cross section is 7.46 pb.}
! 404: \label{b_veto_type_3}
! 405: \end{table}
! 406:
! 407:
! 408: \begin{table}[t]
! 409: %\begin{ruledtabular}
! 410: \begin{tabular}{cccc}
! 411: \hline
! 412: Sample & &
! 413: \# of events\\
! 414: \hline
! 415: data&
! 416: &
! 417: 1217 \\
! 418: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow\tau+jets$&
! 419: &
! 420: 32.94 $\pm$ 0.48\\
! 421: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow e+jets$&
! 422: &
! 423: 17.02 $\pm$ 0.34&\\
! 424: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow\mu+jets$&
! 425: &
! 426: 14.37 $\pm$ 0.32&\\
! 427: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow l+l$&
! 428: &
! 429: 2.43 $\pm$ 0.06&\\
! 430: $Wbb+jets\rightarrow$ $l\nu+bb+jets$&
! 431: &
! 432: 6.33 $\pm$ 0.23\\
! 433: $Wcc+jets\rightarrow$ $l\nu+cc+jets$&
! 434: &
! 435: 4.63 $\pm$ 0.19\\
! 436: $Wjj+jets\rightarrow$ $l\nu+jj+jets$&
! 437: &
! 438: 11.34 $\pm$ 0.26\\
! 439: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $\tau\tau+bb+jets$&
! 440: &
! 441: 0.50 $\pm$ 0.06\\
! 442: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $\tau\tau+cc+jets$&
! 443: &
! 444: 0.58 $\pm$ 0.06\\
! 445: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $\tau\tau+jj+jets$&
! 446: &
! 447: 1.10 $\pm$ 0.13 \\
! 448: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $ee+bb+jets$&
! 449: &
! 450: 0.01 $\pm$ 0.01\\
! 451: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $ee+cc+jets$&
! 452: &
! 453: 0.01 $\pm$ 0.01\\
! 454: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $ee+jj+jets$&
! 455: &
! 456: 0.00 $\pm$ 0.00 \\
! 457: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $\mu\mu+bb+jets$&
! 458: &
! 459: 0.03 $\pm$ 0.01\\
! 460: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $\mu\mu+cc+jets$&
! 461: &
! 462: 0.04 $\pm$ 0.01\\
! 463: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $\mu\mu+jj+jets$&
! 464: &
! 465: 0.02 $\pm$ 0.01 \\
! 466: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $\nu\nu+bb+jets$&
! 467: &
! 468: 1.07 $\pm$ 0.17\\
! 469: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $\nu\nu+cc+jets$&
! 470: &
! 471: 0.57 $\pm$ 0.10\\
! 472: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $\nu\nu+jj+jets$&
! 473: &
! 474: 0.36 $\pm$ 0.04 \\ \hline
! 475: \end{tabular}
! 476: \caption{loose-tight data set composition for types 1 and 2 $\tau$ when the assumed cross section is 7.46 pb.}%\end{ruledtabular}
! 477: \label{loosetight1_2}
! 478: \end{table}
! 479:
! 480:
! 481:
! 482:
! 483: \begin{table}[t]
! 484: %\begin{ruledtabular}
! 485: \begin{tabular}{cccc}
! 486: \hline
! 487: Sample & &
! 488: \# of events\\
! 489: \hline
! 490: data&
! 491: &
! 492: 4733\\
! 493: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow\tau+jets$&
! 494: &
! 495: 51.16 $\pm$ 0.57\\
! 496: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow e+jets$&
! 497: &
! 498: 40.02 $\pm$ 0.50\\
! 499: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow\mu+jets$&
! 500: &
! 501: 48.00 $\pm$ 0.56\\
! 502: $t\overline{t}\rightarrow l+l$&
! 503: &
! 504: 2.16 $\pm$ 0.05\\
! 505: $Wbb+jets\rightarrow$ $l\nu+bb+jets$&
! 506: &
! 507: 8.95 $\pm$ 0.27\\
! 508: $Wcc+jets\rightarrow$ $l\nu+cc+jets$&
! 509: &
! 510: 7.80 $\pm$ 0.23\\
! 511: $Wjj+jets\rightarrow$ $l\nu+jj+jets$&
! 512: &
! 513: 16.32 $\pm$ 0.30 \\
! 514: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $\tau\tau+bb+jets$&
! 515: &
! 516: 0.52 $\pm$ 0.05\\
! 517: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $\tau\tau+cc+jets$&
! 518: &
! 519: 0.46 $\pm$ 0.04\\
! 520: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $\tau\tau+jj+jets$&
! 521: &
! 522: 1.16 $\pm$ 0.12 \\
! 523: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $ee+bb+jets$&
! 524: &
! 525: 0.00 $\pm$ 0.00\\
! 526: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $ee+cc+jets$&
! 527: &
! 528: 0.00 $\pm$ 0.00\\
! 529: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $ee+jj+jets$&
! 530: &
! 531: 0.01 $\pm$ 0.01 \\
! 532: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $\mu\mu+bb+jets$&
! 533: &
! 534: 0.06 $\pm$ 0.01\\
! 535: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $\mu\mu+cc+jets$&
! 536: &
! 537: 0.07 $\pm$ 0.01\\
! 538: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $\mu\mu+jj+jets$&
! 539: &
! 540: 0.11 $\pm$ 0.02 \\
! 541: $Zbb+jets\rightarrow$ $\nu\nu+bb+jets$&
! 542: &
! 543: 2.49 $\pm$ 0.24\\
! 544: $Zcc+jets\rightarrow$ $\nu\nu+cc+jets$&
! 545: &
! 546: 1.90 $\pm$ 0.14\\
! 547: $Zjj+jets\rightarrow$ $\nu\nu+jj+jets$&
! 548: &
! 549: 1.28 $\pm$ 0.08 \\ \hline
! 550: \end{tabular}
! 551: %\end{ruledtabular}
! 552: \caption{loose-tight data set composition for type 3 $\tau$ when the assumed cross section is 7.46 pb.}
! 553: \label{loosetight_3}
! 554: \end{table}
! 555:
! 556: \clearpage
FreeBSD-CVSweb <freebsd-cvsweb@FreeBSD.org>
![[BACK]](/icons/small/back.gif){kind=icon}
Return to b_and_tau.tex CVS log ![[TXT]](/icons/small/text.gif){kind=icon}
![[DIR]](/icons/small/dir.gif){kind=icon}
Up to [Nicadd] / ttbar / p20_taujets_note