Annotation of ttbar/p20_taujets_note/b_and_tau.tex, revision 1.1.1.1
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