1

Data driven estimate of electron fake background with fake rate measured from jet

data

Xin Wu

University of Geneva

2

Method and applcation

• “Fakeable” (“denominator”) object: a jet, or better a jet reconstructed as an electron object, passed some loose identification cut

• Fake rate: probability of a fakeable object to pass the nominal electron ID cuts (eg. isEM Medium + BL cut)

• Estimate fake rate from jet samples

– No electron trigger bias -> flexibility in defining fakeable selection

– Real electrons need to be removed or subtracted (eg. Z, W, …)

– Statistics is often a problem because of prescales

• often as function of pt and eta

• Application for Z’ analysis : electron+fake background (eg. W+jets)

– Highest pt electron passed nominal cut pairs with all fakeable objects in the event, the fake rate of the fakeable object is the event weight of the pair. The sample of all the pairs is the electron+fake background

– More elaborated paring schemes possible

€

fake rate = # of fakeable objects passed nominal ID cut - # of real electron

# of fakeable objects - # of real electron

3

Fakeable selection

• Minimize bias (differences) between fakeable objects in the jet sample and in the analysis sample but retain enough statistics

– In particular jet trigger threshold bias

• Basic selection A (Author electron with nominal track cut)

– same grl, vtx, eta, OTX

– Track cut in Medium (TRACKINGNOBLAYER)

– B Layer cut

• Further selections

– R: Hadronic leakage (HADLEAKETA_ELECTRON)

– L: Hadronic leakage + Reta (isEM Loose)

– (can consider add loose isolation, to R, if isolation used in the nominal selection)

• Validation

– Invariant mass low mass region

4

Data sample

• JetTauEtmiss AOD from run 178044 and 178109, ~13 pb-1

– data11_7TeV.00178044.physics_JetTauEtmiss.merge.AOD.f354_m765

– data11_7TeV.00178109.physics_JetTauEtmiss.merge.AOD.f354_m765

– Egamma GRL

– Z removal: reject events containing a pair of the fakeable objects of base selection with invariant mass between 70 and 110 GeV, if one of the object also passed isEM loose cut (0.4% event rejected)

events objects

• Selection A, Et > 25GeV: 365,474 579,894

• Selection R (A + HadLeakage): 19,008 19,274

• Selection L (A + Loose) : 4,035 4,055

• Medium selection: 1,410 1,419

• Jet trigger considered : EF_jXX_a4_EFFS

– XX: 20, 30, 40 55 75 100 135

L1 RD0 J10 J15 J30 J50 J75 J75

5

Z veto

6

Mee with two Loose+BL

• Answer to the question raised last week

– no statistics of loose-loose pairs from the jet sample

7

Fakeable object Et distribution, selection A

8

Fakeable object Et distribution, selection R

• Would be nice to has x2 less prescale on EF_j100

9

Fakeable object Et distribution, selection L

• Would help to have lower prescales on EF_j100 and EF_j75

10

Et distribution, nominal Medium selection

• Real electrons from W not yet removed/subtracted

11

Fake rate, selection A

• Clear bias from trigger threshold

• W not yet removed subtracted

12

Fake rate, selection R

• Trigger bias and W need to be removed

13

Fake rate, selection L

• Limited statistics

• Trigger bias and W need to be removed

14

Et of fakeable objects in Zprime sample

•

15

Conclusion

• Preliminary studies of extracting electron fake rate from jet data

• 3 sets of fakeable selections

– Basic selection (A): author electron with nominal track cut

– Selection R: A + Hadronic leakage

– Selection L: A + isEM Loose• Selection L has limited statistics for fake rate calculation

• Z removal with invariant mass cut, W removal to be done

– W can also subtracted using MC, but luminosity with prescales of many jet samples would be complicated

• Important trigger bias need to be removed

– Will study removing fakeable objects matched to the trigger jet

• Could profit from lower prescale for jet samples, in particular EF_j100 and EF_j75