Add HHModelPinvVHH model.
This PR adds a variant of the HH model with support for the VHH process. The overall rate is now composed of r * [GGF + VBF + VHH]
with a corresponding rate parameter r_vhh
to control the standalone rate of VHH. The additions to the model are mostly a copy of what is already there for VBF with a few things left to do:
-
Verify that the VHH formula is indeed similar to VBF. Right now, it's really just a plain copy. -
Update the cross section values of the VHH samples. -
Check if the label naming scheme is applicable. Maybe it's worth to rename C3
tokl
to be fully consistent with the GGF and VBF samples. -
Update tasks and plots for additional r_vhh
parameter.
When merged, the new model should perhaps live next to the existing one to avoid interference with the current GGF+VBF combination efforts. In the long term, this combined model might be favorable though.
Merge request reports
Activity
added model label
added 1 commit
- dfce6efe - Adapt tasks and plots for additional r_vhh parameter.
added 1 commit
- 0863a484 - update xsecs for VHH process and follow naming conventions
Looks like this converged quite quickly.
@lowang Can you try to create a limit scan with this branch? E.g.
law run PlotUpperLimits \ --version dev1_model \ --hh-model HHModelPinvVHH.model_default \ --datacards <your_cards_here> \ --pois r_vhh \ --scan-parameters C2V,-10,10,21 \ --show-parameters kl,CV \ --workers <cores>
If you are on a Mac and have iterm with
imgcat
enabled, you can also add--view-cmd imgcat
which will show the plot in the terminal after the tasks are done.Edited by Marcel RiegerHi Marcel,
I run the command on our test datacard and it seems running smoothly without errors.
limits__poi_r_vhh__scan_C2V_-10.0_10.0_n21__params_r1.0_r_qqhh1.0_r_gghh1.0_kl1.0_kt1.0_CV1.0.pdf
Fyi, I ran a quick comparison with the bbzz4l datacards (which do only depend on
r_gghh
) to check if the results remain the same. So indeed, datacards without the samples that are matched by the model and assigned to the respectiver_*
parameter are still evaluated correctly (the curves are identical).Edited by Marcel Rieger@lowang Good to hear!
Did you disable the uncertainty band in your plot?
You can also add
--y-log
for better visualization.Edited by Marcel RiegerYeah it seems the r is too large that y-axis overshadowed the uncertainty band. limits__poi_r_vhh__scan_C2V_-10.0_10.0_n21__params_r1.0_r_qqhh1.0_r_gghh1.0_kl1.0_kt1.0_CV1.0__log.pdf
- Resolved by Marcel Rieger
Ah that rings a bell. The smooth graph area interpolation fails in ROOT when the point errors are outside the canvas. You can set
--y-max
to e.g. 1e7 to verify that the bands are at least extracted correctly.Edited by Marcel Rieger
I checked your output,
and combine can't estimate the other quantiles (see attachment), so I think we can leave it like that for now.
@lcadamur Would you mind having a look at the model file? The VHH-related parts are really just plain copies of the VBF code. Thank you!
Edited by Marcel Rieger