(8,0)

(0.,6.)[(a)]{} (15,6.)[(b)]{}

Figure \[fig:q0counting\](b) shows distributions of $q_0$ assuming a strength parameter $\mu^{\prime}$ equal to 0 and 1. The histograms show the Monte Carlo simulation of the corresponding distributions using the parameters $s = 10$, $b = 10$, $\tau = 1$. For the distribution $f(q_0|1)$ from Eq. (\[eq:fq0muprimewald\]), one requires the value of $\sigma$, the standard deviation of $\hat{\mu}$ assuming a strength parameter $\mu^{\prime} = 1$. Here this was determined from Eq. (\[eq:sigma02\]) using the Asimov value $q_{0,{\rm A}}$, i.e., the value obtained from the Asimov data set with $n \rightarrow \mu^{\prime} s + b$ and $m \rightarrow \tau b$.

We can investigate the accuracy of the approximations used by comparing the discovery significance for a given observed value of $q_0$ from the approximate formula with the exact significance determined using a Monte Carlo calculation. Figure \[fig:q0test\](a) shows the discovery significance that one finds from $q_0 = 16$. According to Eq. (\[eq:Z0\]), this should give a nominal significance of $Z = \sqrt{q_0} = 4$, indicated in the figure by the horizontal line. The points show the exact significance for different values of the expected number of background events $b$ in the counting analysis with a scale factor $\tau = 1$. As can be seen, the approximation underestimates the significance for very low $b$, but achieves an accuracy of better than 10% for $b$ greater than around 4. It slightly overestimates for $b$ greater than around 5. This phenomenon can be seen in the tail of $f(q_0|0)$ in Fig. \[fig:q0counting\](b), which uses $b = 10$. The accuracy then rapidly improves for increasing $b$.

(10.0,6.5) (.8,0)

(8,0)

(0.,6.)[(a)]{} (15,6.)[(b)]{}

Figure \[fig:q0test\](b) shows the median value of the statistic $q_
( 8,0) 

 (0.,6.)[(a) ] { } (15,6.)[(b) ] { } 

 Figure   \[fig: q0counting\](b) shows distributions of $ q_0 $ assuming a strength argument $ \mu^{\prime}$ adequate to 0 and 1. The histogram show the Monte Carlo simulation of the corresponding distribution using the parameters $ s = 10 $, $ bel = 10 $, $ \tau = 1$. For the distribution $ f(q_0|1)$ from Eq.   (\[eq: fq0muprimewald\ ]), one want the value of $ \sigma$, the standard deviation of $ \hat{\mu}$ wear a strength parameter $ \mu^{\prime } = 1$. Here this was specify from Eq.   (\[eq: sigma02\ ]) using the Asimov value $ q_{0,{\rm A}}$, i.e., the value obtained from the Asimov datum set with $ n \rightarrow \mu^{\prime } s + b$ and $ m \rightarrow \tau b$. 

 We can investigate the accuracy of the approximations used by comparing the discovery significance for a contribute observed value of $ q_0 $ from the approximate formula with the exact meaning determined using a Monte Carlo calculation. trope   \[fig: q0test\](a) shows the discovery meaning that one finds from $ q_0 = 16$. accord to Eq.   (\[eq: Z0\ ]), this should give a nominal significance of $ omega = \sqrt{q_0 } = 4 $, indicated in the figure by the horizontal line. The points show the exact meaning for unlike value of the expected number of background events $ b$ in the counting analysis with a plate factor $ \tau = 1$. As can be watch, the approximation underestimates the significance for very depleted $ b$, but achieves an accuracy of better than 10% for $ b$ greater than about 4. It slenderly overestimates for $ b$ greater than around 5. This phenomenon can be seen in the stern of $ f(q_0|0)$ in Fig.   \[fig: q0counting\](b), which uses $ b = 10$. The accuracy then rapidly improves for increasing $ b$. 

 (10.0,6.5) (.8,0) 

 (8,0) 

 (0.,6.)[(a) ] { } (15,6.)[(b) ] { } 

 Figure   \[fig: q0test\](b) shows the median value of the statistic $ q _
(8,0)

(0.,6.)[(a)]{} (15,6.)[(b)]{}

Vigure \[fig:q0counting\](b) showr distributions of $q_0$ avsuminf a strevgth parameter $\mu^{\prime}$ equal ti 0 ane 1. The histograms show the Montv Carlo sumuletion of the corcsspondiky disfvibutnois using the patameters $s = 10$, $b = 10$, $\tau = 1$. For tfe distribution $f(q_0|1)$ from Eq. (\[eq:fq0muprimerald\]), onr gequires the vwlue jf $\sjgma$, the standard deviation of $\hat{\ju}$ assuking a strengyh parameter $\mu^{\prime} = 1$. Herf thls was determined vrom Eq. (\[eq:sitma02\]) twing the Asioov value $q_{0,{\rm A}}$, i.e., the value obtained from the Asimov data set with $b \eigjjarrow \mu^{\prine} s + b$ and $m \rigmnarrow \dau b$.

We can investigabe thx acxuracy of the approxikations used by coiparing tve discovery signifucqnce xor d gixwn ubstrvxd balue lf $s_0$ from the approximatw formula with the txasn significancs detewmyned using a Monte Carlo calculation. Ficurs \[fig:q0test\](a) shows the diwcovery significance jhat one fynds from $q_0 = 16$. According to Eq. (\[eq:Z0\]), this should give a nojknao fktnlficance of $Z = \sqrt{q_0} = 4$, indicated in the figurq bu nhe horizontal like. The points show tje gxact significxnce for sifferent values ov the evpectwd number of nackground events $b$ in the xounting anajtsis with a scale yactor $\tau = 1$. As van br seen, the approximatiou undedestimates hhe signirkcance for very uow $b$, but achieves an accuracy jf better thau 10% for $b$ grester tran around 4. It slightly overestimahes flr $b$ greater than around 5. This phenomenon cei be seen in jhe tapl of $f(q_0|0)$ nn Fig. \[nig:q0counting\](b), wrich uses $b = 10$. Jhe accurccy thdn rapidly improvxs for increwsing $b$.

(10.0,6.5) (.8,0)

(8,0)

(0.,6.)[(a)]{} (15,6.)[(b)]{}

Ficore \[fig:q0test\](b) vhows thq meeian value uw the statistiv $q_
(8,0) (0.,6.)[(a)]{} (15,6.)[(b)]{} Figure \[fig:q0counting\](b) shows distributions assuming strength parameter equal to 0 the Carlo simulation of corresponding distributions using parameters $s = 10$, $b = $\tau = 1$. For the distribution $f(q_0|1)$ from Eq. (\[eq:fq0muprimewald\]), one requires the of $\sigma$, the standard deviation of $\hat{\mu}$ assuming a strength parameter $\mu^{\prime} = Here was from (\[eq:sigma02\]) using the Asimov value $q_{0,{\rm A}}$, i.e., the value obtained from the Asimov data set $n \rightarrow \mu^{\prime} s + b$ and $m \tau b$. We can the accuracy of the approximations by the discovery for given value of $q_0$ the approximate formula with the exact significance determined using a Monte Carlo calculation. Figure \[fig:q0test\](a) shows the significance that from $q_0 16$. to (\[eq:Z0\]), this should nominal significance of $Z = \sqrt{q_0} in the figure by the horizontal line. The show the significance for different values of the number of background events $b$ in the counting with a scale factor $\tau = 1$. As can be seen, the approximation underestimates the very low $b$, but an accuracy of than for greater around 4. slightly overestimates for $b$ greater than around 5. This phenomenon can seen in the tail of $f(q_0|0)$ in Fig. \[fig:q0counting\](b), which = The accuracy then improves for increasing $b$. (.8,0) (0.,6.)[(a)]{} (15,6.)[(b)]{} Figure \[fig:q0test\](b) median of
(8,0)

(0.,6.)[(a)]{} (15,6.)[(b)]{}

Figure \[fig:q0counting\](b) showS distributIons oF $q_0$ aSsuMiNg a sTrenGth parameter $\mu^{\PRime}$ Equal to 0 and 1. The histogramS show ThE montE caRlo siMulatioN Of THE coRrEsPonDiNG dIstriButIons usiNg the paramEteRs $S = 10$, $b = 10$, $\tau = 1$. For the dIStRibution $f(q_0|1)$ FroM Eq. (\[eq:fq0mupriMewAld\]), one ReQuiREs the ValUe of $\sIgma$, thE StandaRd deviatiOn OF $\hat{\mu}$ ASsuming A STrEngtH parameter $\mu^{\prime} = 1$. hErE This was determiNed froM EQ. (\[Eq:SIGma02\]) UsiNg the AsimoV vAlue $q_{0,{\RM A}}$, i.e., the VAlUE OBtaINed from the AsiMov data set wITh $n \RightaRrOw \mU^{\Prime} s + B$ and $m \RiGHtaRrow \tau b$.

We cAn inVestigate The accURacy of tHE approxImatioNs uSed By coMPaRiNg tHe DIscOVeRy sIGniFicance fOr A gIven oBserVED VAlue Of $q_0$ From The apProximate formUla With THe eXact sIgnifIcanCe DeterMined uSing a moNte Carlo calculaTion. figure \[fig:Q0teSt\](A) shOwS the dIScoverY siGniFicance That one FIndS fROM $Q_0 = 16$. ACcording to Eq. (\[eq:Z0\]), thiS sHOUlD give a noMinal sIGnIfICance of $Z = \SqRt{q_0} = 4$, IndiCATed in The fIGuRe by the hOrizonTAl LiNe. The poInTs show ThE exAct SigniFIcanCe for dIfferent ValueS Of the expected nUMber of backgroUNd EVEnTS $b$ in The Counting anaLysiS With A scaLE fActOR $\tau = 1$. AS can bE sEEn, THe approximation undeReStimatEs the Significance fOr very low $b$, BUT Achieves An acCUrACy of better than 10% For $b$ gReater than ARound 4. It sLightLy overesTimates foR $B$ Greater tHan AroUnd 5. thiS PHeNomenon can be sEEN in tHe Tail of $f(Q_0|0)$ in fig. \[fig:q0CouNtiNg\](b), WhiCh Uses $b = 10$. The aCcuracy tHeN rApIdLy iMprovES for incrEaSinG $b$.

(10.0,6.5) (.8,0)

(8,0)

(0.,6.)[(A)]{} (15,6.)[(b)]{}

FIgure \[FIg:q0tesT\](b) shoWs thE mEdIAn vAlue of tHE sTATistIc $Q_
(8,0)

(0.,6.)[(a)]{} (15, 6.)[(b)]{} 

Fig ure  \[ fi g:q0 coun ting\](b) show s  dis tributions of $q_0$ as sumin ga  str e ng th pa rameter $\ m u ^{\ pr im e}$  e q ua l to0 a nd 1. T he histogr ams  s how the Mont e  C arlo simul ati on of the co rre spondi ng  di s tribu tio ns us ing th e  param eters $s=1 0$, $b = 10$,$ \ ta u =1$. For the distr i bu t ion $f(q_0|1)$  fromEq .  ( \ [ eq: fq0 muprimewal d\ ]), o n e requi r es t h e v a lue of $\sigm a$, the sta n dar d devi at ion of $\h at{\m u} $  as suming a st reng th parame ter $\ m u^{\pri m e} = 1$ . Here  th iswasd et er min ed fro m  E q.( \[e q:sigma0 2\ ])  usin g th e A s imov  va lue$q_{0 ,{\rm A}}$, i .e. , th e  va lue o btain ed f ro m the  Asimo v dat aset with $n \ri ghta rrow \mu^ {\p ri me}  s  + b$ and $m  \r igh tarrow\tau b$ . 

W ec a n  i nvestigate the acc ur a c yof the a pproxi m at io n s used b ycom pari n g  thedisc o ve ry signi ficanc e  f or  a give nobserv ed  va lue  of $ q _0$from t he appro ximat e  formula witht he exact sign i fi c a nc e  det erm ined usinga Mo n te C arlo ca lcu l ation . Fig ur e  \ [ fig:q0test\](a) sho ws  the d iscov ery significa nce that o n e finds fr om $ q _0 = 16$. Accordi ng to  Eq. (\[eq : Z0\]), t his s hould gi ve a nomi n a l signif ica nce  of  $Z =  \ sqrt{q_0} = 4 $ ,  ind ic ated in  th e figur e b y t hehor iz ontal lin e. The p oi nt ssh owthe e x act sign if ica nc e f or di f ferent  valu es o fth e  ex pectedn um b e r of  b ac kgro und  e vents  $b$ inthe cou nting ana lys i s wi th  a  scalefactor $\tau=1$. As can  b e s een, t h e  approxi mation underestimates t h e signi fic anceforvery low$b$ , butach i eves a n accu racyof  be t t er th a n  1 0%fo r $b$ grea t e r t han a ro und4. It s lightly overestima t esfor $b$ great erthan a ro und 5. Thi sp hen o m enon can be see n in the t ai l  o f $f(q_0|0 ) $ i nFig. \[ fig:q0c ounti n g\](b),  which us es $b = 1 0$ . Th e acc uracy then  rapidly  improves for i n cr easin g $ b$.

( 10 .0, 6.5)(.8,0) 
(8 ,0)
(0.,6. )[ (a)]{}  (15, 6. )[(b)]{} 

Figure \[fig:q0test\] (b) sh ows t hemedian va lue ofthe stati stic  $q_
(8,0)

(0.,6.)[(a)]{} (15,6.)[(b)]{}

Figure \[fig:q0counting\](b)_shows distributions_of $q_0$ assuming a_strength parameter_$\mu^{\prime}$_equal to_0_and 1. The_histograms show the_Monte Carlo simulation of_the corresponding distributions_using_the parameters $s = 10$, $b = 10$, $\tau = 1$. For the distribution_$f(q_0|1)$_from Eq. (\[eq:fq0muprimewald\]),_one_requires_the value of $\sigma$, the_standard deviation of $\hat{\mu}$ assuming_a strength_parameter $\mu^{\prime} = 1$. Here this was determined_from_Eq. (\[eq:sigma02\]) using the_Asimov value $q_{0,{\rm A}}$, i.e., the value obtained from_the Asimov data set with $n_\rightarrow \mu^{\prime} s_+_b$_and $m \rightarrow \tau_b$.

We can investigate the accuracy of_the approximations used by comparing the_discovery significance for a given observed value_of $q_0$ from the approximate formula_with the exact significance determined_using a_Monte Carlo calculation. Figure \[fig:q0test\](a) shows_the discovery significance_that one_finds from $q_0_= 16$. According to Eq. (\[eq:Z0\]), this_should give a_nominal significance of $Z = \sqrt{q_0}_=_4$, indicated in_the_figure_by the_horizontal line. The_points_show the_exact_significance for different values of the_expected_number of background events $b$ in the_counting analysis with a_scale_factor $\tau = 1$._As can be seen, the_approximation underestimates the significance for very_low $b$,_but achieves_an accuracy of better than 10% for $b$ greater than around_4. It slightly overestimates for $b$_greater than around 5._This phenomenon_can_be seen in_the_tail of_$f(q_0|0)$ in Fig. \[fig:q0counting\](b), which uses $b =_10$. The_accuracy then rapidly improves for increasing_$b$.

(10.0,6.5) (.8,0)

(8,0)

(0.,6.)[(a)]{} (15,6.)[(b)]{}

Figure \[fig:q0test\](b) shows_the_median value of the statistic $q_