Line: 1 to 1  

B2hh GFact Asymmetry Fitting page 
Line: 1 to 1  

B2hh GFact Asymmetry Fitting page 
Line: 1 to 1  

B2hh GFact Asymmetry Fitting page 
Line: 1 to 1  

B2hh GFact Asymmetry Fitting page  
Line: 23 to 23  
In the solution for this distribution the resultant pdf needs an error function of a complex number (x+iy), which there is no such routine in root. Hence we wrote a routine to use the infinite series approximation for complex error function from Abramozitz and Stegun (page 299, equation 7.1.29) which yields the folowing results for up to 7 terms of the series summation.  
Changed:  
< <  The new PDF has been plotted showing the real and imaginary parts, along with the old PDF in the following new PDF. The imaginary part is, as expected, zero with only the entry at time t= tmin giving a delta function.  
> >  The new PDF has calculated and its corresponding normalisation. The imaginary part is, as expected, zero with only the entry at time t= tmin giving a delta function.The following plot compares the basic pdf, Christoph's pdf and my new pdf, here.  
Changed:  
< <  A comparision of the normalised old PDF (blue oscillations) and the new UNnormalised PDF (red oscillations) is shown here.  
> >  The area under the curves (summed over the plus and minus tag states) were calculated numerically using a step size of 0.5fs and in a range of tmin to 50ps and the following was found:  
Changed:  
< <  Next the normalisation was implemented and again a comparision of the normalised old PDF (blue oscillations) and the new normalised PDF (red oscillations) is shown here with the real and imaginary PDFs and the old PDF is shown here. The area under the curves (summed over the plus and minus tag states) were calculated numerically using a step size of 0.5fs and in a range of tmin to 50ps and the following was found:
Old PDF area = 0.99983 (0.02% from 1.0)  
> >  Old PDF area = 1.000169 ( < 0.02% from 1.0)  
New PDF area = 0.985813 (1.4% from 1.0)  
Changed:  
< <  Now need to understand if this 1.4% is significant (trawled through normalisation calculation and can not find any errors). Next task is to move all this code over to GFact so can change to use this new PDF for Bs2KK.  
> >  Need to understand if this 1.4% is significant then the next task is to move all this code over to GFact so can change to use this new PDF for Bs2KK.  
Basic Checks with asymmetry fitterToy data was generated with a mix of 56.1% Bd → π π, 10.3% Bd → K π and 33.6% combinatoric background with ssb of 0.664 (ssb is S/S+B) generated in a mass region of 55.8 GeV. The mistag rates in generation and fitting was ωBs = 0.361and ωBd = 0.355 and ACPBd→Kπ = 0.1. 100 data sets with 100,000 events per data set was used here but Lars ran with 1000 data sets with 100k events per set and found no bias on the pulls and much improved uncertainties. I just show the plots below (100 data sets) for completion.  
Line: 120 to 118  
 
Added:  
> > 

Line: 1 to 1  

B2hh GFact Asymmetry Fitting page 
Line: 1 to 1  

B2hh GFact Asymmetry Fitting page  
Line: 25 to 25  
The new PDF has been plotted showing the real and imaginary parts, along with the old PDF in the following new PDF. The imaginary part is, as expected, zero with only the entry at time t= tmin giving a delta function.  
Changed:  
< <  A comparision of the normalised old PDF (blue oscillations) and the new UNnormalised PDF (red oscillations) is shown here. I am now attempting to code up the normalisation and will upload the comparison plots once successful.  
> >  A comparision of the normalised old PDF (blue oscillations) and the new UNnormalised PDF (red oscillations) is shown here.  
Added:  
> >  Next the normalisation was implemented and again a comparision of the normalised old PDF (blue oscillations) and the new normalised PDF (red oscillations) is shown here with the real and imaginary PDFs and the old PDF is shown here. The area under the curves (summed over the plus and minus tag states) were calculated numerically using a step size of 0.5fs and in a range of tmin to 50ps and the following was found:
Old PDF area = 0.99983 (0.02% from 1.0) New PDF area = 0.985813 (1.4% from 1.0) Now need to understand if this 1.4% is significant (trawled through normalisation calculation and can not find any errors). Next task is to move all this code over to GFact so can change to use this new PDF for Bs2KK.  
Basic Checks with asymmetry fitterToy data was generated with a mix of 56.1% Bd → π π, 10.3% Bd → K π and 33.6% combinatoric background with ssb of 0.664 (ssb is S/S+B) generated in a mass region of 55.8 GeV. The mistag rates in generation and fitting was ωBs = 0.361and ωBd = 0.355 and ACPBd→Kπ = 0.1. 100 data sets with 100,000 events per data set was used here but Lars ran with 1000 data sets with 100k events per set and found no bias on the pulls and much improved uncertainties. I just show the plots below (100 data sets) for completion.  
Line: 111 to 118  
 
Added:  
> > 

Line: 1 to 1  

B2hh GFact Asymmetry Fitting page  
Line: 11 to 11  
PDF modeling for Bs  
Changed:  
< <  The basic pdf of  
> >  The basic pdf that was implemented in the asymmetry fitter had the following form  
Changed:  
< <  f(t,tmin, signal)=N*exp(t/τ)[1+q(12ω)(Adir.cos(Δmt)Amix.cos(Δmt))]  
> >  f(t,tmin, signal)=N*exp(t/τ)[1+q(12ω)(Adir.cos(Δmt)Amix.cos(Δmt))].  
Changed:  
< <  with standard values has been plotted with q=+1 (red) and q=1 (blue) and gives the following distribution. The integrated area from tmin to 10.0 is 0.994402.
 
> >  This PDF has been plotted with standard values for the Bs→KK decay for the tags of q=+1 (red) and q=1 (blue) and shown here Old PDF distribution. The integrated area from tmin (nominally set to 1.0) to 10.0 is 0.994402.  
I am studiying the pdf obtained from the following distribution  
Changed:  
< <  f(ttmin,signal)=N.1/τ.exp(t/τ).[cosh(ΔΓ.t/2)A_ΔΓ.sinh(ΔΓ/2)].[1+q(12ω).(Adir.cos(Δmt)Amix.cos(Δmt))].Θ(t) conv 1/√2πexp(t't)^2/2σ^2  
> >  f(ttmin,signal)=N.1/τ.exp(t/τ).[cosh(ΔΓ.t/2)A_ΔΓ.sinh(ΔΓ/2)].[1+q(12ω).(Adir.cos(Δmt)Amix.cos(Δmt))].Θ(t) conv 1/√2πexp(t't)^2/2σ^2.
In the solution for this distribution the resultant pdf needs an error function of a complex number (x+iy), which there is no such routine in root. Hence we wrote a routine to use the infinite series approximation for complex error function from Abramozitz and Stegun (page 299, equation 7.1.29) which yields the folowing results for up to 7 terms of the series summation. The new PDF has been plotted showing the real and imaginary parts, along with the old PDF in the following new PDF. The imaginary part is, as expected, zero with only the entry at time t= tmin giving a delta function.  
Changed:  
< <  The resultant pdf needs an error function of a complex number (x+iy) which there is no such routine in Root so using the infinite series approximation for complex error function from Abramozitz and Stegun we have written a routine which yields the folowing results for up to 7 terms of the series summation.  
> >  A comparision of the normalised old PDF (blue oscillations) and the new UNnormalised PDF (red oscillations) is shown here. I am now attempting to code up the normalisation and will upload the comparison plots once successful.  
Basic Checks with asymmetry fitter  
Line: 107 to 109  
 
Added:  
> > 

Line: 1 to 1  

B2hh GFact Asymmetry Fitting page  
Line: 15 to 15  
f(t,tmin, signal)=N*exp(t/τ)[1+q(12ω)(Adir.cos(Δmt)Amix.cos(Δmt))]  
Changed:  
< <  with standard values has been plotted with q=+1 (red) and q=1 (blue) and gives the following distribution. The integrated area from tmin to 10.0 is 0.994402.  
> >  with standard values has been plotted with q=+1 (red) and q=1 (blue) and gives the following distribution. The integrated area from tmin to 10.0 is 0.994402.  
Line: 23 to 23  
f(ttmin,signal)=N.1/τ.exp(t/τ).[cosh(ΔΓ.t/2)A_ΔΓ.sinh(ΔΓ/2)].[1+q(12ω).(Adir.cos(Δmt)Amix.cos(Δmt))].Θ(t) conv 1/√2πexp(t't)^2/2σ^2  
Changed:  
< <  The resultant pdf needs an error function of a complex number (x+iy) which there is no such routine in Root so using the infinite series approximation for complex error function from Abramozitz and Stegun we have written a routine which yileds the folowing results for up to 6 terms of the series summation.
 
> >  The resultant pdf needs an error function of a complex number (x+iy) which there is no such routine in Root so using the infinite series approximation for complex error function from Abramozitz and Stegun we have written a routine which yields the folowing results for up to 7 terms of the series summation.  
Basic Checks with asymmetry fitter  
Line: 108 to 106  
 
Added:  
> > 

Line: 1 to 1  

B2hh GFact Asymmetry Fitting page  
Line: 21 to 21  
I am studiying the pdf obtained from the following distribution  
Changed:  
< <  f(ttmin,signal)=N.1/τ.exp(t/τ)[1+q(12ω){Adir.cos(Δmt)Amix.cos(Δmt)}Θ(t)conv 1/√2πexp(t't)^2/2σ^2  
> >  f(ttmin,signal)=N.1/τ.exp(t/τ).[cosh(ΔΓ.t/2)A_ΔΓ.sinh(ΔΓ/2)].[1+q(12ω).(Adir.cos(Δmt)Amix.cos(Δmt))].Θ(t) conv 1/√2πexp(t't)^2/2σ^2  
Changed:  
< <  and obtained the following for q=+1 (red) and q=1(blue).  
> >  and obtained the following for q=+1 (red) and q=1(blue)....  
Deleted:  
< <  
Basic Checks with asymmetry fitterToy data was generated with a mix of 56.1% Bd → π π, 10.3% Bd → K π and 33.6% combinatoric background with ssb of 0.664 (ssb is S/S+B) generated in a mass region of 55.8 GeV. The mistag rates in generation and fitting was ωBs = 0.361and ωBd = 0.355 and ACPBd→Kπ = 0.1. 100 data sets with 100,000 events per data set was used here but Lars ran with 1000 data sets with 100k events per set and found no bias on the pulls and much improved uncertainties. I just show the plots below (100 data sets) for completion. 
Line: 1 to 1  

B2hh GFact Asymmetry Fitting pageThe aims for the asymmetry fitter are the following  
Changed:  
< < 
 
> > 
PDF modeling for BsThe basic pdf of f(t,tmin, signal)=N*exp(t/τ)[1+q(12ω)(Adir.cos(Δmt)Amix.cos(Δmt))] with standard values has been plotted with q=+1 (red) and q=1 (blue) and gives the following distribution. The integrated area from tmin to 10.0 is 0.994402.
I am studiying the pdf obtained from the following distribution f(ttmin,signal)=N.1/τ.exp(t/τ)[1+q(12ω){Adir.cos(Δmt)Amix.cos(Δmt)}Θ(t)conv 1/√2πexp(t't)^2/2σ^2 and obtained the following for q=+1 (red) and q=1(blue).
 
Basic Checks with asymmetry fitterToy data was generated with a mix of 56.1% Bd → π π, 10.3% Bd → K π and 33.6% combinatoric background with ssb of 0.664 (ssb is S/S+B) generated in a mass region of 55.8 GeV. The mistag rates in generation and fitting was ωBs = 0.361and ωBd = 0.355 and ACPBd→Kπ = 0.1. 100 data sets with 100,000 events per data set was used here but Lars ran with 1000 data sets with 100k events per set and found no bias on the pulls and much improved uncertainties. I just show the plots below (100 data sets) for completion.  
Line: 88 to 104  
 
Added:  
> > 

Line: 1 to 1  

B2hh GFact Asymmetry Fitting page  
Line: 14 to 14  
Toy data was generated with a mix of 56.1% Bd → π π, 10.3% Bd → K π and 33.6% combinatoric background with ssb of 0.664 (ssb is S/S+B) generated in a mass region of 55.8 GeV. The mistag rates in generation and fitting was ωBs = 0.361and ωBd = 0.355 and ACPBd→Kπ = 0.1. 100 data sets with 100,000 events per data set was used here but Lars ran with 1000 data sets with 100k events per set and found no bias on the pulls and much improved uncertainties. I just show the plots below (100 data sets) for completion.  
Changed:  
< <  Adir Bd  input was 0.38 and fitted was 0. ± 0. ( A^{dir}_{Bd}) Amix Bd  input was 0.61 and fitted was 0. ± 0. ( A^{mix}_{Bd})  
> >  Adir Bd  input was 0.38 and fitted was 0.3814 ± 0.0043 ( A^{dir}_{Bd}) Amix Bd  input was 0.61 and fitted was 0.6089 ± 0.0026 ( A^{mix}_{Bd})  
Next I generated a data sample with the following composition (calculating for our mass range...) and simultaneously fitted for the Bd2pipi asymmetries and the Bs2KK asymmetries (for now there is still no proper time description in the fitting pdf but there is Gaussian smear on the data generation). Note the mistag rates will change for simultaneous fitting to ωBs = 0.347and ωBd = 0.370.  
Line: 84 to 86  
 
Added:  
> > 

Line: 1 to 1  

B2hh GFact Asymmetry Fitting page  
Line: 9 to 9  
 
Changed:  
< < 
 
> > 
 
Basic Checks with asymmetry fitter  
Changed:  
< <  Toy data was generated with a mix of 56.1% Bd → π π, 10.3% Bd → K π and 33.6% combinatoric background with ssb of 0.664 (ssb is S/S+B) generated in a mass region of 55.8 GeV. The mistag rates in generation and fitting was ωBs = 0.361and ωBd = 0.355 and ACPBd→Kπ = 0.1.  
> >  Toy data was generated with a mix of 56.1% Bd → π π, 10.3% Bd → K π and 33.6% combinatoric background with ssb of 0.664 (ssb is S/S+B) generated in a mass region of 55.8 GeV. The mistag rates in generation and fitting was ωBs = 0.361and ωBd = 0.355 and ACPBd→Kπ = 0.1. 100 data sets with 100,000 events per data set was used here but Lars ran with 1000 data sets with 100k events per set and found no bias on the pulls and much improved uncertainties. I just show the plots below (100 data sets) for completion.  
Adir Bd  input was 0.38 and fitted was 0. ± 0. ( A^{dir}_{Bd}) Amix Bd  input was 0.61 and fitted was 0. ± 0. ( A^{mix}_{Bd})  
Changed:  
< <  Everything below is out of date and will be removed as soon as the above is updated with the newest and unbiased results. Jobs running now.  
> >  Next I generated a data sample with the following composition (calculating for our mass range...) and simultaneously fitted for the Bd2pipi asymmetries and the Bs2KK asymmetries (for now there is still no proper time description in the fitting pdf but there is Gaussian smear on the data generation). Note the mistag rates will change for simultaneous fitting to ωBs = 0.347and ωBd = 0.370.  
Added:  
> >  Everything below is out of date and will be removed as soon as the above is updated with the newest and unbiased results. Jobs running now.  
1. B_{d} → π π
50 datasets were generated with 6099 events per data set using 0.68 b2pipi (sf1=1 and ssb = 0.68) and 0.32 combinatoric background (MassDistribution) mass distribution. The asymmetry fitter was used to fit for Bd asymmetries only with sf1'=0.68 and obtained the following: 
Line: 1 to 1  

B2hh GFact Asymmetry Fitting pageThe aims for the asymmetry fitter are the following
 
Added:  
> > 
 
 
Deleted:  
< < 
 
 
Changed:  
< < 
Most of the following is on my web page http://ppewww.physics.gla.ac.uk/~alison/B2hh.html where all the attached files are there and work. I have now stopped using my web page and will now just post all my results here.  
> > 
 
Basic Checks with asymmetry fitter  
Added:  
> > 
Toy data was generated with a mix of 56.1% Bd → π π, 10.3% Bd → K π and 33.6% combinatoric background with ssb of 0.664 (ssb is S/S+B) generated in a mass region of 55.8 GeV. The mistag rates in generation and fitting was ωBs = 0.361and ωBd = 0.355 and ACPBd→Kπ = 0.1.
Adir Bd  input was 0.38 and fitted was 0. ± 0. ( A^{dir}_{Bd}) Everything below is out of date and will be removed as soon as the above is updated with the newest and unbiased results. Jobs running now.  
1. B_{d} → π π
50 datasets were generated with 6099 events per data set using 0.68 b2pipi (sf1=1 and ssb = 0.68) and 0.32 combinatoric background (MassDistribution) mass distribution. The asymmetry fitter was used to fit for Bd asymmetries only with sf1'=0.68 and obtained the following: 
Line: 1 to 1  

B2hh GFact Asymmetry Fitting page  
Line: 16 to 16  
50 datasets were generated with 6099 events per data set using 0.68 b2pipi (sf1=1 and ssb = 0.68) and 0.32 combinatoric background (MassDistribution) mass distribution. The asymmetry fitter was used to fit for Bd asymmetries only with sf1'=0.68 and obtained the following: Adir Bd  input was 0.38 and fitted was 0.3953 ± 0.0476 ( A^{dir}_{Bd}) Amix Bd  input was 0.61 and fitted was 0.6503 ± 0.0311 ( A^{mix}_{Bd}) Then reran same job with 150 data sets with 2000 events per data set and fitted for the following: Adir Bd  input was 0.38 and fitted was 0.4338 ± 0.0196 ( A^{dir}_{Bd}) Amix Bd  input was 0.61 and fitted was 0.6619 ± 0.0197 ( A^{mix}_{Bd}) The asymmetry plot is shown here .  
Changed:  
< <  ******100 data sets with 10k events per data set using 0.68 b2pipi (sf1=1 and ssb = 0.68) and 0.32 combinatoric background and mass window of 5229  5329 MeV, I fit the following asymmetries:  
> >  ******240 data sets with 6k (running just now will update when gets to 300) events per data set using 0.68 b2pipi (sf1=1 and ssb = 0.68) and 0.32 combinatoric background and mass window of 5229  5329 MeV, I fit the following asymmetries:  
Changed:  
< <  Adir Bd  input was 0.38 and fitted was 0.4078 ± 0.0077 ( A^{dir}_{Bd}) Amix Bd  input was 0.61 and fitted was 0.599 ± 0.006 ( A^{mix}_{Bd})  
> >  Adir Bd  input was 0.38 and fitted was 0.4175 ± 0.0080 ( A^{dir}_{Bd}) Amix Bd  input was 0.61 and fitted was 0.675 ± 0.006 ( A^{mix}_{Bd})  
2. B_{s} → K K  
Line: 74 to 74  
 
Changed:  
< < 
 
> > 

Line: 1 to 1  

B2hh GFact Asymmetry Fitting page  
Line: 15 to 15  
1. B_{d} → π π
50 datasets were generated with 6099 events per data set using 0.68 b2pipi (sf1=1 and ssb = 0.68) and 0.32 combinatoric background (MassDistribution) mass distribution. The asymmetry fitter was used to fit for Bd asymmetries only with sf1'=0.68 and obtained the following:  
Added:  
> > 
******100 data sets with 10k events per data set using 0.68 b2pipi (sf1=1 and ssb = 0.68) and 0.32 combinatoric background and mass window of 5229  5329 MeV, I fit the following asymmetries:
Adir Bd  input was 0.38 and fitted was 0.4078 ± 0.0077 ( A^{dir}_{Bd})  
2. B_{s} → K K
50 datasets were generated with 6099 events per data set using 0.68 bs2KK (sf3=1 and ssb = 0.68) and 0.32 combinatoric background ( mass distribution ). The asymmetry fitter was used to fit for Bs asymmetries only with sf3'=0.68 and obtained the following Adir for Bd and Amix for Bs which in numbers are:  
Line: 69 to 74  
 
Added:  
> > 

Line: 1 to 1  

B2hh GFact Asymmetry Fitting pageThe aims for the asymmetry fitter are the following  
Changed:  
< < 
 
> > 
 
 
Line: 18 to 18  
2. B_{s} → K K
50 datasets were generated with 6099 events per data set using 0.68 bs2KK (sf3=1 and ssb = 0.68) and 0.32 combinatoric background ( mass distribution ). The asymmetry fitter was used to fit for Bs asymmetries only with sf3'=0.68 and obtained the following Adir for Bd and Amix for Bs which in numbers are:  
Added:  
> > 
Ran a job with 100 data sets with 6000 events per data set using 0.664 Bs2KK and 0.336 combinatoric background.
Adir Bs  input was 0.1 and fitted was 0.06436 ± 0.00630 ( A^{dir}_{Bs}) Now ran the same job as above but removed the Gaussian smearing of the proper time in the toy data generation and reran the job and got the exact same asymmetries and uncertainties. This should make a difference surely? Still looking in to it.  
3. B_{d} → π π and B_{d} → K π
50 data sets were generated with 6099 events per data set using 0.68 bd2pipi and bd2Kpi (sf1=sf2=0.5 and ssb = 0.68) and 0.32 combinatoric background ( mass distribution ).The asymmetry fitter was used to fit for Bd asymmetries only with sf1'=sf2'=0.34 and obtained the following Adir for Bd and Amix for Bd which in numbers are:  
Line: 28 to 34  
Amix Bd  input was 0.61 and fitted was 0.6811 ± 0.0019 ( A^{mix}_{Bd}) and Laurence got 0.655 ± 0.024  
Changed:  
< <  The asymmetry plot is shown here . However the pull plots are still showing a large bias in the mean of the pull plot (the widths are approximately ok). What's causing the bias in the pull plots? It is not present in the first case when on ly B2pipi and combinatoric background are used....looking in to this now.  
> >  The asymmetry plot is shown here . However the pull plots are still showing a large bias in the mean of the pull plot (the widths are approximately ok). What's causing the bias in the pull plots? It is not present in the first case when only B2pipi and combinatoric background are used....looking in to this now. Interesteingly, in an earlier version of Laurence's thesis he has numbers like mine then they suddenly got really good. Waiting to hear back from him to see if he can remember what he changed.  
4. B_{d} → π π, B_{d} → K π and B_{s} → K K
50 datasets were generated with 6099 events per data set using all 3 channels with sf1=sf2=sf3=0.333 and ssb = 0.68) and 0.32 combinatoric background ( mass distribution ). The asymmetry fitter was used to fit for Bd asymmetries only with sf1'=sf2'=sf3'=0.226 and obtained the following Adir for Bd and Amix for Bd which in numbers are:  
Added:  
> >  5. Full toy data sample  
 AlisonBates  20100806  
Line: 60 to 67  
 
Added:  
> > 

Line: 1 to 1  

B2hh GFact Asymmetry Fitting page  
Line: 22 to 22  
50 data sets were generated with 6099 events per data set using 0.68 bd2pipi and bd2Kpi (sf1=sf2=0.5 and ssb = 0.68) and 0.32 combinatoric background ( mass distribution ).The asymmetry fitter was used to fit for Bd asymmetries only with sf1'=sf2'=0.34 and obtained the following Adir for Bd and Amix for Bd which in numbers are: Adir Bd  input was 0.38 and fitted was 0.298 ± 0.206 Amix Bd  input was 0.61 and fitted was 0.660 ± 0.062  
Changed:  
< <  Now using 150 data sets with 100k events per data set using bd2pipi and bd2Kpi (sf1= 0.845 and sf2=0.155 and ssb = 0.664, see Laurence's thesis, page 183). The asymmetry fitter was used to fit for Bd asymmetries with sf1'=0.561 and sf2'=0.103 and obtained the following: Adir Bd  input was 0.38 and fitted was 0.4241 ± 0.0017 ( A^{dir}_{Bd}) and Laurence got 0.407 ± 0.033 Amix Bd  input was 0.61 and fitted was 0.6818 ± 0.0018 ( A^{mix}_{Bd}) and Laurence got 0.655 ± 0.024 The asymmetry plot is shown here . The pull plots show a large bias. The only difference was the large mass window I used (4800  5800 MeV) compared with Laurence (5229  5329 MeV). Hence I have rerun the same signal fractions in a 5fb1 job (300 data sets with 100k events per data set) with the much tighter mass window and found the following:  
> >  Now using 150 data sets with 100k events per data set using bd2pipi and bd2Kpi (sf1= 0.845 and sf2=0.155 and ssb = 0.664, see Laurence's thesis, page 183). The asymmetry fitter was used to fit for Bd asymmetries with sf1'=0.561 and sf2'=0.103 and obtained the following: Adir Bd  input was 0.38 and fitted was 0.4241 ± 0.0017 ( A^{dir}_{Bd}) and Laurence got 0.407 ± 0.033 Amix Bd  input was 0.61 and fitted was 0.6818 ± 0.0018 ( A^{mix}_{Bd}) and Laurence got 0.655 ± 0.024 The asymmetry plot is shown here . The pull plots show a large bias. The only difference was the large mass window I used (4800  5800 MeV) compared with Laurence (5229  5329 MeV). Hence I have rerun the same signal fractions in a 5fb1 job (288 data sets with 100k events per data set) with the much tighter mass window and found the following:  
Changed:  
< <  Adir Bd  input was 0.38 and fitted was 0. ± 0. ( A^{dir}_{Bd}) and Laurence got 0.407 ± 0.033  
> >  Adir Bd  input was 0.38 and fitted was 0.4245 ± 0.0022 ( A^{dir}_{Bd}) and Laurence got 0.407 ± 0.033  
Changed:  
< <  Amix Bd  input was 0.61 and fitted was 0. ± 0. ( A^{mix}_{Bd}) and Laurence got 0.655 ± 0.024  
> >  Amix Bd  input was 0.61 and fitted was 0.6811 ± 0.0019 ( A^{mix}_{Bd}) and Laurence got 0.655 ± 0.024  
Changed:  
< <  The asymmetry plot is shown here .  
> >  The asymmetry plot is shown here . However the pull plots are still showing a large bias in the mean of the pull plot (the widths are approximately ok). What's causing the bias in the pull plots? It is not present in the first case when on ly B2pipi and combinatoric background are used....looking in to this now.  
4. B_{d} → π π, B_{d} → K π and B_{s} → K K
50 datasets were generated with 6099 events per data set using all 3 channels with sf1=sf2=sf3=0.333 and ssb = 0.68) and 0.32 combinatoric background ( mass distribution ). The asymmetry fitter was used to fit for Bd asymmetries only with sf1'=sf2'=sf3'=0.226 and obtained the following Adir for Bd and Amix for Bd which in numbers are:  
Line: 57 to 57  
 
Added:  
> > 

Line: 1 to 1  

Added:  
> > 
B2hh GFact Asymmetry Fitting pageThe aims for the asymmetry fitter are the following
Most of the following is on my web page http://ppewww.physics.gla.ac.uk/~alison/B2hh.html where all the attached files are there and work. I have now stopped using my web page and will now just post all my results here. Basic Checks with asymmetry fitter1. B_{d} → π π
50 datasets were generated with 6099 events per data set using 0.68 b2pipi (sf1=1 and ssb = 0.68) and 0.32 combinatoric background (MassDistribution) mass distribution. The asymmetry fitter was used to fit for Bd asymmetries only with sf1'=0.68 and obtained the following: 2. B_{s} → K K
50 datasets were generated with 6099 events per data set using 0.68 bs2KK (sf3=1 and ssb = 0.68) and 0.32 combinatoric background ( mass distribution ). The asymmetry fitter was used to fit for Bs asymmetries only with sf3'=0.68 and obtained the following Adir for Bd and Amix for Bs which in numbers are: 3. B_{d} → π π and B_{d} → K π
50 data sets were generated with 6099 events per data set using 0.68 bd2pipi and bd2Kpi (sf1=sf2=0.5 and ssb = 0.68) and 0.32 combinatoric background ( mass distribution ).The asymmetry fitter was used to fit for Bd asymmetries only with sf1'=sf2'=0.34 and obtained the following Adir for Bd and Amix for Bd which in numbers are:
Now using 150 data sets with 100k events per data set using bd2pipi and bd2Kpi (sf1= 0.845 and sf2=0.155 and ssb = 0.664, see Laurence's thesis, page 183). The asymmetry fitter was used to fit for Bd asymmetries with sf1'=0.561 and sf2'=0.103 and obtained the following: Adir Bd  input was 0.38 and fitted was 0. ± 0. ( A^{dir}_{Bd}) and Laurence got 0.407 ± 0.033 Amix Bd  input was 0.61 and fitted was 0. ± 0. ( A^{mix}_{Bd}) and Laurence got 0.655 ± 0.024 The asymmetry plot is shown here . 4. B_{d} → π π, B_{d} → K π and B_{s} → K K
50 datasets were generated with 6099 events per data set using all 3 channels with sf1=sf2=sf3=0.333 and ssb = 0.68) and 0.32 combinatoric background ( mass distribution ). The asymmetry fitter was used to fit for Bd asymmetries only with sf1'=sf2'=sf3'=0.226 and obtained the following Adir for Bd and Amix for Bd which in numbers are:  AlisonBates  20100806
