Page MenuHomeHEPForge

Fixed D0->pi+pi-pi0 amplitudes
ClosedPublic

Authored by lmassa on Jun 22 2023, 10:24 AM.

Details

Summary

Fixes T219

Test Plan

New coefficients tested using the GENERIC_DALITZ model within the Belle II software Framework https://github.com/belle2/basf2 https://software.belle2.org/.

Diff Detail

Repository
rEVTGEN evtgen
Branch
local/fix-d023pi
Lint
No Lint Coverage
Unit
No Test Coverage
Build Status
Buildable 252
Build 252: arc lint + arc unit

Event Timeline

lmassa created this revision.
lmassa changed the visibility from "All Users" to "Public (No Login Required)".Jun 22 2023, 10:26 AM
lmassa changed the edit policy from "All Users" to "Restricted Project (Project)".
lmassa added a project: Restricted Project.
tlatham edited subscribers, added: Restricted Project; removed: tlatham.

Many thanks for this @lmassa and apologies for the delay in looking at it.

All the numbers match those in your presentation. I just want to run it through our testing framework, where we should hopefully see the same changes in the distributions.

The plots look good, e.g. the m_ij^2 projections as per your slide 19:

massSq_1_2.png (472×696 px, 9 KB)

massSq_2_3.png (472×696 px, 10 KB)

massSq_1_3.png (472×696 px, 9 KB)

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Aug 23 2023, 3:02 PM

I also checked that the numbers are consistent with the ones from the presentation. It might be a good idea to add a comment in the code that the amplitude magnitudes are obtained from the mentioned BaBar paper but corrected for normalisation.

In D94#2535, @abudinen wrote:

It might be a good idea to add a comment in the code that the amplitude magnitudes are obtained from the mentioned BaBar paper but corrected for normalisation.

Indeed, that's a very good point @abudinen. I think just after line 772 of EvtDDalitz.cpp would be the place to add it. It could even include a link to T219, where the slides are accessible. @lmassa, could you please add such a comment?

  • Added comment documenting the change

Thank you @tlatham for reviewing the distributions, it is a really helpful cross-check.

I added the comment as you suggested.

Thanks for adding the comment @lmassa. However, it looks like some other things have changed as well. See:
https://phab.hepforge.org/D94?vs=402&id=412#toc
Are those additional changes intentional?

No, they were not... I updated the differential revision from a different computer, so perhaps the local branches were not synced or correctly copied for some reason. Let me make another revision.

  • Reverted local changes that were not meant to be published

It appears I somehow checked out a local commit that was not supposed to end up in the revision. Now I reverted it. The diff from the initial DR to now shows only the comment in EvtDDalitz.cpp https://phab.hepforge.org/D94?vs=402&id=413#toc as it should be.

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.