User Tools

Site Tools


2017:groups:tools:resonance_aware

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
2017:groups:tools:resonance_aware [2017/06/11 11:33]
emanuele.re
2017:groups:tools:resonance_aware [2017/06/15 14:02] (current)
emanuele.re
Line 1: Line 1:
 ===== Resonance-aware NLO+PS sub working group ===== ===== Resonance-aware NLO+PS sub working group =====
  
-** interested people:** Emanuele, Luca, Ben, Efe, Luca, Tomas Jezo, Markus Seidel, Alexander Grohsjean, ​**...put your name here...**+** interested people:** Emanuele, Luca, Ben, Efe, Tomas Jezo, Markus Seidel, Alexander Grohsjean, ​Ludovic Scyboz, Philippe G., ADD YOUR NAME HERE
  
 A discussion is scheduled for Monday morning. A discussion is scheduled for Monday morning.
  
-Possible topics: ​+The more recent results from the ongoing (TH) study using the powheg-box-res framework (developed in  
 +https://​arxiv.org/​abs/​1509.09071 and https://​arxiv.org/​abs/​1607.04538) can be found here (P. Nason talk) 
 +https://​indico.cern.ch/​event/​596233/​timetable/​ 
 + 
 + 
 +Possible topics ​for LH 
 + 
 +     * experimental needs
  
      * availability of benchmarks results      * availability of benchmarks results
Line 13: Line 20:
      * uncertainties      * uncertainties
  
-     * comparison powheg vs mc@nlo (any news from sherpa?)+     * comparison powheg vs mc@nlo (any news from herwig, or sherpa?) 
 + 
 +------------ 
 + 
 +**Discussion on Monday:** 
 + 
 +overview: {{:​2017:​2017_06_12.pdf |slides }} 
 + 
 +ATLAS perspective:​ {{:​2017:​leshouches_atlas_powhegwwbbnlo.pdf | slides}} 
 + 
 +technicalities (bb4l generator):​ 
 + 
 +   * make sure that numerical accuracy reached in event generation from MC is the same as in TH-paper 
 + 
 +       * possible to have grids from the authors (seems to be a viable solution, as atlas and cms will agree - or already agreed - on the settings) 
 + 
 +       * if grids will be provided, need to agree on parameters to scan upon. It seems that order 20 runs will  be enough (a scan would mostly be done using 5-10 values for mtop, and 2-3 values for hdamp) 
 + 
 +       * It might even be possible to use the powheg reweighting machinery to avoid having to re-run all the grids. This might depend on how far mtop is moved from the central value. T. Jezo and collaborators have tried this. Perhaps it'd be useful to perform a closure-test,​ but using the outermost mtop values that atlas/cms would use. 
 + 
 +       * this reweighting would miss the mtop dependence in R/B. There exists an experimental facility in powheg, to capture these effects via a reweighting,​ but it was implemented only for DY, and rarely used. Not clear it would work here. 
 + 
 +[ER: to be continued] 
 + 
 + 
 + 
2017/groups/tools/resonance_aware.1497173617.txt.gz · Last modified: 2017/06/11 11:33 by emanuele.re