-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
QCD, pileup, parton showering uncs. #201
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
rkansal47
commented
Jun 26, 2024
- QCD scale and PDF acceptance shape uncertainties
- Pileup for all MC
- ISR/FSR parton showering uncertainties for signal only
- Test
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you produce templates and make sure that lnN values and shapes make sense?
|
||
if wshift == "scale": | ||
# renormalization / factorization scale uncertainty is the max/min envelope of the variations | ||
shape_up = np.max(whists.values(), axis=0) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am not sure this is correct. Shouldn't it be shape_up
of all the variations except (4) and then compare that with weight (4)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The weights should already be with respect to the nominal (4) from the skimmer.
nom_vals = h[sample, :].values() | ||
abs_unc = np.linalg.norm( | ||
(whists.values() - nom_vals), axis=0 | ||
) # / np.sqrt(103) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why is # / np.sqrt(103)
commented? maybe get rid of it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes it is not necessary (wasn't sure before).
Sorry I don't think I have time for that today. |