Differenze

Queste sono le differenze tra la revisione selezionata e la versione attuale della pagina.

--- cms:hig-12-005 [04/05/2012 12:08]
migliore
+++ cms:hig-12-005 [04/05/2012 14:31] (versione attuale)
migliore
@@ Linea 78: / Linea 78: @@
 Ernesto
-Only one main comment: it is a bit strange that in all the CL figures the observed median is essentially always below
+One main comment: it is a bit strange that in all the CL figures the observed median is essentially always below
-the expceted median. Does it point to some systematic error on the efficiency/
+the expected median. Does it indicate some systematic error (overestimation of the efficiency, luminosity actually used or
+some missing background)?
+Fig.1: (right) Use W+ only (or add charge conjugate symbols for the phi). In general the choice of the symbols  for the lepton (roman l) and for the lepton flavour index (I,J,K,L) is not optimal (by chance it happens that there is a nu_L in a context where it could interpreted as "left" instead of a flavour index.
+- Section 4.2: the pT thresholds for electrons and muons are quite different: if there is a interest in going down to 5 GeV for the muon, the same should be true also for the electron (and there are analyses in CMS using electrons with ET< 10 GeV) Which is the reason for the different choice of the thresholds?
+Fig. 3: in the legend, "+jets"  seems to indicate explicitly that the inclusive process is meant. I think this is true also for the single-top
+Fig. 4: (left) remove single-top from the legend (as it does not show up in the plot)
+Section 4.6: probably too sub-sections too short
+Section 5: probably not split it into 5.1 and 5.2
+Table 4: (last line) "GeV" in math mode
+Table 6/Fig. 5: is it ordinary to include limits from different experiments in the summary of the CMS results?