In an attempt to understand what may be wrong with the ATLAS Z0 8 TeV low mass data set, I suggest to implement a variant of the data set in which we implement the piece of information of Table 6 in 1710.05167. As you can see, there are just four sources of uncertainty there: the uncorrelated statistical uncertainty, the uncorrelated systematic uncertainty, the 100% correlated systematic uncertainty and the 100% 1.9% luminosity uncertainty. This is way simpler than dealing with the 200+ systematic uncertainties available on Hepdata that are currently implemented. In my opinion this variant can be useful to understand whether the chi2 is really crazily high when correlating the lumi uncertainty. We can then go back and compare the two variants in an attempt to check the correlation of each of the 200+ sys uncs at a later stage. @scarlehoff can you assign the implementation of the variant to some person of good will?
In an attempt to understand what may be wrong with the ATLAS Z0 8 TeV low mass data set, I suggest to implement a variant of the data set in which we implement the piece of information of Table 6 in 1710.05167. As you can see, there are just four sources of uncertainty there: the uncorrelated statistical uncertainty, the uncorrelated systematic uncertainty, the 100% correlated systematic uncertainty and the 100% 1.9% luminosity uncertainty. This is way simpler than dealing with the 200+ systematic uncertainties available on Hepdata that are currently implemented. In my opinion this variant can be useful to understand whether the chi2 is really crazily high when correlating the lumi uncertainty. We can then go back and compare the two variants in an attempt to check the correlation of each of the 200+ sys uncs at a later stage. @scarlehoff can you assign the implementation of the variant to some person of good will?