FEAT: update analysis results with LS-model

[mmikhasenko]

Once #192 is fixed, the last skipped model can be included to the list of systematics

[mmikhasenko]

@redeboer how do you run the preview?

[redeboer]

Actually you can now just push to a new branch on the gitlab mirror and download the artifacts from the pipeline.

But to update the preview website, checkout your branch and push to the preview repo:

# git remote add preview https://gitlab.cern.ch/polarimetry/Lc2pKpi-preview.git
git push preview HEAD:main --force

[mmikhasenko]

🚀

https://gitlab.cern.ch/polarimetry/Lc2pKpi-preview/-/pipelines/4810746

[redeboer]

The pipeline will fail, because the uncertainties notebook asserts that decay rates haven't changed. Hope the resonance polarimeter notebook is still cached though, because that one takes ages to run...

Does make me think we may need to write some tests that compares whether the framework produces the same results as the ones published in the paper. That way, you can refactor without affecting the physics results (want to do that for e.g. ComPWA/ampform#318) and we will also more easily see when results need to be updated. Also better to write it as a test, not as a notebook cell, so that the pipeline notices this earlier.

[redeboer]

At any rate, observables do seem to be very consistent now 🎉

$$ \begin{array}{ccr} \overline{\alpha_x} & = & \left(-62.6 \pm 4.5_{-14.8}^{+8.4} \right) \times 10^{-3} \\ \overline{\alpha_y} & = & \left(+8.9 \pm 8.9_{-12.7}^{+9.1} \right) \times 10^{-3} \\ \overline{\alpha_z} & = & \left(-278.0 \pm 23.7_{-40.4}^{+12.6} \right) \times 10^{-3} \\ \overline{\left|\alpha\right|} & = & \left(669.4 \pm 9.3_{-10.4}^{+15.3} \right) \times 10^{-3} \\ \end{array} $$

$$ \begin{array}{ccl} \left|\overline{\alpha}\right| & = & \left(+285.1 \pm 24.0_{-13.8}^{+37.9} \right) \times 10^{-3} \\ \theta\left(\overline{\alpha}\right) & = & \left(+0.929 \pm 0.002_{-0.011}^{+0.017} \right) \times \pi \\ \phi\left(\overline{\alpha}\right) & = & \left(+0.955 \pm 0.045_{-0.028}^{+0.067} \right) \times \pi \\ \end{array} $$

$$ \begin{array}{l|c|c} \textbf{Resonance} & \textbf{Decay rate} & \textbf{LHCb} \\ \hline \Lambda(1405) & 7.78 \pm 0.43_{-2.53}^{+3.01} & 7.7 \pm 0.2 \pm 3.0 \\ \Lambda(1520) & 1.91 \pm 0.10_{-0.24}^{+0.04} & 1.86 \pm 0.09 \pm 0.23 \\ \Lambda(1600) & 5.16 \pm 0.28_{-1.93}^{+0.50} & 5.2 \pm 0.2 \pm 1.9 \\ \Lambda(1670) & 1.15 \pm 0.04_{-0.29}^{+0.06} & 1.18 \pm 0.06 \pm 0.32 \\ \Lambda(1690) & 1.16 \pm 0.01_{-0.33}^{+0.06} & 1.19 \pm 0.09 \pm 0.34 \\ \Lambda(2000) & 9.55 \pm 0.67_{-2.26}^{+0.83} & 9.58 \pm 0.27 \pm 0.93 \\ \Delta(1232) & 28.73 \pm 1.34_{-0.79}^{+1.76} & 28.6 \pm 0.29 \pm 0.76 \\ \Delta(1600) & 4.50 \pm 0.51_{-1.40}^{+0.93} & 4.5 \pm 0.3 \pm 1.5 \\ \Delta(1700) & 3.89 \pm 0.07_{-0.48}^{+0.94} & 3.9 \pm 0.2 \pm 0.94 \\ K(700) & 2.99 \pm 0.20_{-0.59}^{+0.91} & 3.02 \pm 0.16 \pm 0.92 \\ K(892) & 21.95 \pm 1.24_{-0.70}^{+0.59} & 22.14 \pm 0.23 \pm 0.64 \\ K(1430) & 14.70 \pm 0.80_{-2.67}^{+2.78} & 14.7 \pm 0.6 \pm 2.7 \\ \end{array} $$

$$ \begin{array}{r|rrrr|rrrr} \textbf{Model} & \overline{\alpha}_x & \overline{\alpha}_y & \overline{\alpha}_z & \overline{\left|\alpha\right|} & \Delta\overline{\alpha}_x & \Delta\overline{\alpha}_y & \Delta\overline{\alpha}_z & \Delta\overline{\left|\alpha\right|} \\ \hline \textbf{0} & -62.6 & +8.9 & -278.0 & 669.4 \\ \textbf{1} & -61.6 & +8.5 & -279.4 & 670.7 & +1.0 & -0.4 & -1.4 & +1.3 \\ \textbf{2} & -62.9 & +9.1 & -278.4 & 669.8 & -0.3 & +0.2 & -0.5 & +0.4 \\ \textbf{3} & -58.4 & +7.4 & -276.2 & 667.7 & +4.2 & -1.5 & +1.8 & -1.6 \\ \textbf{4} & -69.3 & +9.5 & -277.2 & 666.9 & -6.6 & +0.6 & +0.8 & -2.5 \\ \textbf{5} & -70.7 & +9.6 & -277.4 & 668.7 & -8.0 & +0.8 & +0.6 & -0.6 \\ \textbf{6} & -69.7 & +9.1 & -281.7 & 673.0 & -7.1 & +0.2 & -3.8 & +3.7 \\ \textbf{7} & -77.4 & +18.0 & -305.4 & 671.4 & -14.8 & +9.1 & -27.5 & +2.1 \\ \textbf{8} & -55.8 & +10.9 & -284.6 & 675.5 & +6.8 & +2.0 & -6.7 & +6.1 \\ \textbf{9} & -66.9 & +4.4 & -290.4 & 672.8 & -4.3 & -4.5 & -12.4 & +3.5 \\ \textbf{10} & -56.4 & +2.4 & -265.4 & 659.0 & +6.2 & -6.5 & +12.6 & -10.4 \\ \textbf{11} & -64.7 & +9.3 & -278.6 & 670.4 & -2.1 & +0.4 & -0.6 & +1.0 \\ \textbf{12} & -75.1 & +1.8 & -283.4 & 663.5 & -12.5 & -7.1 & -5.4 & -5.8 \\ \textbf{13} & -61.8 & +8.1 & -277.3 & 668.8 & +0.9 & -0.8 & +0.7 & -0.6 \\ \textbf{14} & -62.2 & +8.7 & -277.6 & 669.2 & +0.5 & -0.2 & +0.4 & -0.2 \\ \textbf{15} & -54.2 & -3.8 & -318.4 & 684.6 & +8.4 & -12.7 & -40.4 & +15.3 \\ \textbf{16} & -62.1 & +8.2 & -278.1 & 669.5 & +0.5 & -0.7 & -0.1 & +0.2 \\ \textbf{17} & -58.1 & +12.1 & -278.6 & 666.5 & +4.5 & +3.2 & -0.6 & -2.9 \\ \end{array} $$

[mmikhasenko]

great news

[redeboer]

Pipeline is finished, but the LS-model was not yet included in the resonance polarimeters and the polarization fit. Running a new pipeline, but here are the results:

$$ \begin{split}\begin{array}{l|c|c|rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr} & \textbf{this study} & \textbf{LHCb} & \textbf{1} & \textbf{2} & \textbf{3} & \textbf{4} & \textbf{5} & \textbf{6} & \textbf{7} & \textbf{8} & \textbf{9} & \textbf{10} & \textbf{11} & \textbf{12} & \textbf{13} & \textbf{14} & \textbf{15} & \textbf{16} & \textbf{17} \\ \hline K(700) & +63 \pm 78_{-235}^{+238} & +60 \pm 660 \pm 240 & -5 & -14 & -55 & -113 & -100 & +57 & -176 & \color{blue}{-235} & \color{red}{+238} & +96 & +51 & +211 & +52 & +11 & -221 & +12 & +1 \\ K(892) & +29 \pm 15_{-17}^{+31} & & +2 & -0 & +2 & -9 & \color{blue}{-17} & +2 & -5 & +23 & \color{red}{+31} & -8 & +5 & +8 & -3 & -2 & +13 & +1 & +10 \\ K(1430) & -339 \pm 28_{-102}^{+139} & -340 \pm 30 \pm 140 & +3 & +3 & -1 & -2 & +45 & +102 & +125 & -9 & -102 & \color{red}{+139} & -15 & \color{blue}{-102} & +7 & +4 & +6 & -1 & +1 \\ \Lambda(1405) & +580 \pm 31_{-122}^{+278} & -580 \pm 50 \pm 280 & +14 & -7 & +3 & +31 & -3 & -30 & \color{blue}{-122} & -22 & +124 & -64 & +31 & \color{red}{+278} & -17 & -8 & +51 & +0 & +7 \\ \Lambda(1520) & +925 \pm 8_{-84}^{+16} & -925 \pm 25 \pm 84 & +7 & +2 & +2 & \color{red}{+16} & -34 & +2 & +8 & +11 & +7 & -3 & +4 & \color{blue}{-84} & +2 & +1 & -6 & +2 & -10 \\ \Lambda(1600) & +199 \pm 51_{-428}^{+499} & -200 \pm 60 \pm 500 & +10 & -5 & +14 & -5 & +21 & +138 & +100 & \color{red}{+499} & \color{blue}{-428} & -140 & +12 & +72 & -21 & -12 & +13 & -19 & +11 \\ \Lambda(1670) & +817 \pm 15_{-46}^{+73} & -817 \pm 42 \pm 73 & +9 & -10 & +12 & +70 & -41 & -5 & \color{red}{+73} & +30 & +47 & \color{blue}{-46} & +12 & +29 & -5 & -3 & +17 & +3 & -18 \\ \Lambda(1690) & +958 \pm 8_{-35}^{+27} & -958 \pm 20 \pm 27 & -3 & +6 & -12 & \color{blue}{-35} & -14 & +22 & \color{red}{+27} & -20 & +3 & -4 & +5 & +18 & -4 & -1 & -1 & -0 & -9 \\ \Lambda(2000) & -573 \pm 9_{-191}^{+124} & +570 \pm 30 \pm 190 & +9 & -1 & +12 & +47 & -24 & -45 & \color{blue}{-191} & +58 & +85 & +78 & -19 & \color{red}{+124} & +6 & +3 & -9 & -2 & -23 \\ \Delta(1232) & +548 \pm 8_{-27}^{+36} & -548 \pm 14 \pm 36 & +9 & +0 & -9 & -14 & +17 & -1 & +10 & \color{red}{+36} & +5 & -11 & +2 & -8 & -2 & -1 & +12 & -0 & \color{blue}{-27} \\ \Delta(1600) & -502 \pm 9_{-112}^{+162} & +500 \pm 50 \pm 170 & +19 & +10 & +6 & +107 & \color{blue}{-112} & +115 & +88 & +49 & \color{red}{+162} & +5 & +51 & +97 & +16 & +9 & -27 & -3 & -53 \\ \Delta(1700) & +216 \pm 18_{-75}^{+42} & -216 \pm 36 \pm 75 & +40 & +4 & -0 & -19 & -2 & +23 & +16 & \color{red}{+42} & +23 & \color{blue}{-75} & -4 & -2 & +18 & +11 & -3 & +5 & -15 \\ \end{array}\end{split} $$

Extrema of the polarization values seem not to be affected by the inclusion of the LS-model.

[mmikhasenko]

Fantastic.
The next thing is to update ANA note and the PAPER.
I will check the paper now if anything needs to be added. Once done, we can think of the new release, v0.0.5 :)

[redeboer]

Yes and we need to make sure to inform the reviewers about the new values. For instance this "0.01% difference" should also be reformulated (assertion is based on 13 decimals, but need to reword that in science talk).

[redeboer]

Also, LHCb-PAPER-2022-002 was correct right? Only bugs in the framework for producing the cross-check values?

[mmikhasenko]

Also, LHCb-PAPER-2022-002 was correct right? Only bugs in the framework for producing the cross-check values?

No, there are 2 problems:

• the order of particles in not defined in 2022-002
• the convention flips for the scalar K**

this is to be reported.

[redeboer]

Preview looks good ✔️