# Notes on RNNIP fc value Which fc value should be used for the RNNIP discriminant? A) fc = 0.018 -> same as DL1r B) fc = 0.07 -> used in studies before DL1r fc value was determined **if no-one has a strong preference I'd suggest to use the DL1r value** ## Comparison Plots Reference = black: fc = 0.018 Test = blue: fc = 0.07 - dicriminant ![](https://i.imgur.com/7rq9v4i.png =220x) ![](https://i.imgur.com/QqaSl3j.png =220x) ![](https://i.imgur.com/aOnwMv7.png =220x) - ROC curve ![](https://i.imgur.com/lRLc1dN.png =300x) - Nicole also had a plot comparing the discriminant (and could make it quickly for the same range and in logscale :grinning: ) -> distributions look consistent :+1: ![](https://i.imgur.com/zML6kSL.png =230x) ![](https://i.imgur.com/7rq9v4i.png =230x) - (and in non-logscale) ![](https://i.imgur.com/nDIhLO6.png =230x) - efficiency vs Lxy and vs pT plots from the Physval code are here (10k statistics): https://juhofer.web.cern.ch/juhofer/PHYSVAL/ROC_RNNIP_fc_comparisons/ ## WP values (sent by Nicole, just for reference) ![](https://i.imgur.com/3LCE8f7.png)