- pagebs's home page
- Posts
- 2017
- June (1)
- 2016
- 2015
- 2014
- December (2)
- November (1)
- October (2)
- September (4)
- August (1)
- July (2)
- June (2)
- May (3)
- April (2)
- March (2)
- February (2)
- January (1)
- 2013
- November (1)
- October (3)
- September (2)
- August (3)
- July (4)
- June (4)
- May (2)
- April (2)
- March (2)
- February (4)
- January (2)
- 2012
- December (2)
- November (3)
- October (2)
- September (1)
- August (3)
- July (3)
- June (6)
- May (2)
- April (3)
- March (3)
- February (2)
- January (2)
- 2011
- December (2)
- November (1)
- October (7)
- September (3)
- August (2)
- July (5)
- June (2)
- May (2)
- April (4)
- March (2)
- January (1)
- 2010
- December (2)
- October (4)
- September (1)
- August (4)
- July (1)
- June (2)
- May (2)
- March (4)
- February (2)
- January (2)
- 2009
- December (1)
- November (2)
- October (1)
- September (2)
- August (1)
- July (2)
- June (1)
- May (2)
- April (2)
- March (1)
- February (1)
- January (6)
- 2008
- My blog
- Post new blog entry
- All blogs
Run 9 200GeV Dijet Cross Section MSRT2004 Vs CTEQ6M Theory
Here I compare the dijet cross section theory curves using the MSRT2004 PDFs vs the CTEQ6M PDFs ...
The original theory curve that Renee supplied to me used the MSRT2004 PDFs. Recently, she gave me another MSRT2004 theory curve with improved statistics as well as a theory curve using the CTEQ6M PDFs. She also supplied me with the scale uncertainties on the new MSRT2004 theory curve, but I don't show those here. I compare the old and new MSRT theory as well as the CTEQ6M theory with the L2JetHigh cross section I determine using the Bin-by-Bin correction factor method to correct the raw data.
Figure 1: This figure shows the (data-theory)/theory ratio for the old and new MSRT and CTEQ theory curves.
Figure 2: This figure is the same as figure 1 except that the theory curves have had the underlying event and hadronization corrections applied.
- pagebs's blog
- Login or register to post comments