-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Questions on simplified likelihood #19
Comments
Following up on this question, @sabinekraml and @Ga0l made these slides and questions for the simplified likelihoods discussion of the publication of statistical models workshop. |
@kratsg or @lukasheinrich might want to comment as well, but I'll have a shot at this already. Not sure I follow the first point. Setting the pre-fit values of the simplified LH to be the post-fit ones of the full LH is exactly the point since we want to fix the background model to be what you get after running a background-only fit in the full LH (+ massively reducing the number of parameters). By construction, there is no difference in how we handle correlations as compared to any other full LH. Remember, the numbers we plug into the simplified LH come from a full fit using the full LH -- i.e. considering the full list of NPs, channels and samples. The simplified LH itself (after the fit with the full LH) then only has a single nuisance parameter, i.e. here the total uncertainties on the background -- obtained by considering the full set of NPs and all correlations -- are considered to be fully correlated over all regions. |
I'm afraid I don't fully understand, but it's been a long day, including a
long discussion session, and my brain needs a bit of air :-)
In any case, perhaps you can have a look at
https://indico.cern.ch/event/1088121/contributions/4592009/attachments/2343348/3995817/simplify-discussion.pdf
and we get together at some convenient time to talk via Zoom.
Cheers, Sabine
…On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 7:05 PM Eric Schanet ***@***.***> wrote:
@kratsg <https://github.com/kratsg> or @lukasheinrich
<https://github.com/lukasheinrich> might want to comment as well, but
I'll have a shot at this already.
Not sure I follow the first point. Setting the pre-fit values of the
simplified LH to be the post-fit ones of the full LH is exactly the point
since we want to fix the background model to be what you get after running
a background-only fit in the full LH (+ massively reducing the number of
parameters).
By construction, there is no difference in how we handle correlations as
compared to any other full LH. Remember, the numbers we plug into the
simplified LH come from a full fit using the full LH -- i.e. considering
the full list of NPs, channels and samples. The simplified LH itself (after
the fit with the full LH) then only has a single nuisance parameter, i.e.
here the total uncertainties on the background -- obtained by considering
the full set of NPs and all correlations -- are considered to be fully
correlated over all regions.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#19 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG3ROOD4GKUXKU6OEUAN2O3ULKX77ANCNFSM5HYCAHYQ>
.
Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS
<https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675>
or Android
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub>.
--
_______________________________________________________
Sabine Kraml - ***@***.*** - www.kraml.net
LPSC
53 Av des Martyrs
38026 Grenoble
France
(+33)(0)4 76 28 40 52
|
This is a transfer of @sabinekraml's question on scikit-hep/pyhf#1689:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: