Following up from earlier today:

https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/dmawxc/update-09182018-run-9-pp-default-unfolding-vs-efficiency-5-r-02-charged-jets

In the above post, I was changing the response matrix (and priors) when I changed the efficiency.  To really isolate the effect of the efficiency, I fixed the response matrix and the priors.

• The response matrix was calculated from the Run 9 dijet sample using charged hadron triggers with 'eTtrg = 9 - 20' GeV,
• and the priors are the particle and detector level R = 0.2 charged recoil jet spectra from the Run 9 dijet sample using the same triggers.

The jet matching efficiencies were then varied.  I compared 6 cases:

1. The jet matching efficiency as calculated from the Run 9 dijet sample (using charged hadron triggers with 'eTtrg = 9 - 20' GeV)
2. The jet matching efficiency as calculated from the Run 9 dijet sample (using charged hadron triggers with 'eTtrg = 9 - 11' or '11 - 15' GeV)
3. The jet matching efficiency as calculated in Pythia8 with tracking efficiency lowered by 5% (using pi0 triggers with 'eTtrg = 9 - 11' or '11 - 15' GeV)
4. The jet matching efficiency as calculated in Pythia8 with tracking efficiency raised by 5% (using pi0 triggers with 'eTtrg = 9 - 11' or '11 - 15' GeV)
5. The jet matching efficiency as calculated in Pythia8 with tracking efficiency lowered by 5% (using pi0 triggers with 'eTtrg = 9 - 20' GeV)
6. The jet matching efficiency as calculated in Pythia8 with tracking efficiency raised by 5% (using pi0 triggers with 'eTtrg = 9 - 20' GeV)

The plot below compares the unfolding results.

The ratios in both plots are taken with respect to the "default" case, using the embedding efficiency with 'eTtrg = 9 - 20' GeV.  The large jumps at around 'pTjet ~ 20' and 'pTjet ~ 25' GeV/c in the 11 - 15 GeV results are surprising, but I'm not quite sure what caused them...  The efficiencies for each case are presented below.