This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision | Next revision Both sides next revision | ||
2015:groups:sm:photons [2015/06/09 10:26] suzanne.gasconshotkin |
2015:groups:sm:photons [2015/06/09 11:58] gudrun.heinrich |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
B) Fragmentation: How important is the 'transverse' (or non-collinear) vs. 'longitudinal' (or collinear) fragmentation? | B) Fragmentation: How important is the 'transverse' (or non-collinear) vs. 'longitudinal' (or collinear) fragmentation? | ||
- | FO calculators (e.g. PHOX family, MCFM...) only have longitudinal, HO codes with PS (e.g. POWHEG with MiNLO) have both. While waiting for gamma gamma in POWHEG with MiNLO (probably not for proceedings), use Vgamma (and maybe later Zgamma), MCFM vs. POWHEG + MiNLO, as 'test bench' to evaluate difference in integrated xs, differential observables and comparison with CMS/ATLAS data (Mauro/Fulvio, Ciaran et al, all) | + | FO calculators (e.g. PHOX family, MCFM, GoSam, ...) only have longitudinal, HO codes with PS (e.g. POWHEG with MiNLO) have both. While waiting for gamma gamma in POWHEG with MiNLO (probably not for proceedings), use Vgamma (and maybe later Zgamma), MCFM vs. POWHEG + MiNLO, as 'test bench' to evaluate difference in integrated xs, differential observables and comparison with CMS/ATLAS data (Mauro/Fulvio, Ciaran et al, all) |
| |