First Look at Data and MC Comparisons

1
First Look at Data and MC Comparisons for Cedar
and Birch

• Comparisons of physics quantities for CC events
• with permutations of Cedar, Birch, Data and
  MC.
• Low hadronic energy CC event distributions with
  
• Cedar.

Mark Dorman UCL / RAL
ND Phone Meeting (18th Oct.)
2
Cuts and Reweighting

• Pre-selection cuts differ (slightly) from
  standard CC analysis
• Data must pass standard beam quality cuts and
  the special horn
• current runs are excluded.
• CC-like events are then selected with CC PID gt
  -0.1.
• The label 'tuned MC' refers to MC that has been
  weighted using the
• 12 parameter SKZP2 beam and hadron production
  weights and the
• MODBYRS3 generator weights. All MC in this
  talk is tuned.
• I have not used any of the EnergyCorrections
  functions in creating
• PANs for the Cedar MC or Data.

• Event has 1 well reconstructed track and is in
  the 'Pittsburgh' fiducial volume
• If muon momentum is measured from curvature
  then the fractional error on this
• measurement is not more than 30
• Zero or negative muon charge sign
  (anti-neutrino cut)
• Track starts at least 0.5m inside the detector
  (rock muon cut)
• Either there is no event within 50ns of the
  current event or the current event has
• at least 95 of the PH of itself and the
  nearest event (runt event cut)

3
Data Sets, PoTs and Selected CC Event Numbers

• I have used the following LE-10 data sets
• With the cuts listed on the previous page to
  select CC events I get
• the following reconstructed event rates per
  1e19 PoTs and ratios

• Birch MC 2.623e19 PoTs (2554 files)
• Cedar MC 1.352e19 PoTs (1316 files)
• Birch Data 7.118e19 PoTs
• Cedar Data 5.033e19 PoTs

• Birch MC 80703 events
• Cedar MC 90311 events
• Birch Data 82742 events
• Cedar Data 96162 events

Cedar MC / Birch MC 1.119 Cedar Data /
Birch Data 1.162 Birch Data / Birch MC
1.025 Cedar Data / Cedar MC 1.065
4
Reconstructed Neutrino Energy
5
Reconstructed Shower Energy
6
Reconstructed Muon Angle
7
Shower Energy lt 250 MeV CC-like Events
8
Reconstructed Neutrino Energy (Ehad Cut)
9
Reconstructed Muon Angle (Ehad Cut)
10
Shower Energy 0 CC-like Events
11
Reconstructed Neutrino Energy (Ehad0)
12
Reconstructed Muon Angle (Ehad0)
13
Conclusions

• I see more reconstructed events in Cedar data
  and MC as compared
• to Birch data and MC to the tune of 12 (MC)
  and 16 (data).
• This excess is fairly independent of energy,
  angle etc...
• The data/MC ratio for CC-like events in Cedar
  is higher than for
• Birch (1.065 v.s. 1.025).
• As such the low hadronic energy CC sample
  discrepancies seen in
• Birch are not resolved and actually get a
  little worse.
• The Ehad0 neutrino energy data/MC comparisons
  look good but the
• discrepancy in the muon angle is still present
  with Cedar.
• Some (most?) of the Cedar CC sample excesses as
  compared to Birch
• can probably be accounted for by changes in
  the CC PID distribution
• and track finding efficiency. I could look at
  all reconstructed events
• as well as just the CC-like ones.

14
Backup Slides
15
Reconstructed Q2 (Whole CC Sample)
16
Reconstructed W2 (Whole CC Sample)
17
Reconstructed y (Whole CC Sample)
18
Reconstructed x (Whole CC Sample)