phiphi trigger lines

HLT2 line for Bs2phiphi decay mode- twobody combiner has different approach to decrease the rate - product pt of phis have a particular cut in the two-body combiner.

assigned to @pbaladro

added 1 commit

• a64927bc - Fixed formatting

Compare with previous version

Hi, the analysis aims for the early data measurements and the rates and efficiencies are relatively good to go. Would you mind reviewing it?

mode	rate	efficiency	evt type
Bs-->phiphi	0.06 ± 0.02 kHz	0.634 +/- 0.038	13104012

Hi! I'm not sure what is the suggested procedure from our convenors, but I'd say that this can be merged as it improves in almost an order of magnitude the efficiency of the inclusive line. I think we can keep both the inclusive line and also this one. Maybe you could check the efficiency of this MC running on the BdsToKKKK_line. @sperazzi @peilian

Hi @pbaladro @oozcelik , @peilian adding also @mcruztor . To me it looks like the rate is good and such an increase in efficiency is striking. So I don't see a reason to avoid the inclusive line for the B->phiphi decay. Cheers, Stefano

Hi all, this looks good to me as well. I think the check @pbaladro suggested makes sense, so that we would have an idea how the inclusive line performs for this channel.

Hi all, sorry coming back to this late. I have tried quite a few things to get my Moore work but I constantly get an error raised in #417 (closed) recently.

so if you are ok with this MR can we please proceed ? In the meantime, I'll try to have some results on the inclusive sample as well once the issue is fixed. Many thanks.

Hi! I think we can proceed with the merge yes, but your branch is 63 commits behind bnoc_run3. Can you update your branch?

seems ok now? The files that change went up to 135 - not sure if I'm doing right thing here. I'm terrible at git ‍♀️

mmmm it seems like something weird happened, yes. Maybe you can simply try git fetch and update the branch again.

This might be that the bnoc_run3 is behind the master while @oozcelik's branch rebased on the latest master. it might be easier if both of you rebase the branch on the latest master at same point as the master changes very quickly.

Hi @peilian thanks for the suggestion. I have no objection to that. I was just wondering if that would be easier if I would make the MR directly to the master as you all have already reviewed it and have given a green light?

Hi, I would say that it's better to merge all the bnoc lines together. There are a lot of new staff in the branch and it can be a mess if we merge it separately. I've just updated the bnoc_run3 branch with master's status.

ok let me do the same quickly.

mentioned in merge request !1406 (closed)

added 64 commits

• a64927bc...ffe077fd - 63 commits from branch bnoc_run3
• 93d6252c - Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/bnoc_run3' into bnoc_oozcelik

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• 1f501bcb - Adapt to change in PV finder output

Compare with previous version

I rebased the master and now it seems even worse... I really have no idea now what to do .

Honestly I have no idea what is happening. Other MR are working properly: !1406 (diffs) . I think you started working in your branch from master status but you should had started from bnoc_run3.

sorry I don't have time to work on git commands, so I open another MR with the same scripts basically - if you think that can be merged, let's do so !1491 (merged)

mentioned in merge request !1491 (merged)

closed