EWPOs at 161 GeV

[jacoterh]

This PR adds the projections and theory predictions of the Rb, Rc, Rmu, Rtau and sigma_had observables at 161 GeV (needed for the referee reply).

• The predictions contain both 157.5 and 162.5 GeV.
• Experimental uncertainties are taken from Fig. 1 in https://repository.cern/records/3rj9z-94994
• Theoretical predictions are obtained with https://github.com/LHCfitNikhef/smefit_predictions/blob/ewpos_161/theory/EWPO/notebooks/Rf_FCCee/Rf_precomputed.nb
• Relevant scripts are linked in PR https://github.com/LHCfitNikhef/smefit_predictions/pull/104

Todo:

• @moatms: could you take care of the theory covmat implementation? I just put zeros for the time being.
• @ecelada: do you know who took care of the AFB predictions? Can we add these as well at 161 GeV?
• @SimoneTentori: can you please project the FCC-ee implementation to LEP3?

[moatms]

@jacoterh I put the theory covariance for the different scenarios: current/conservative/aggressive.
Regarding your comment about the AFB predictions I don't think we have them for the different energies, only at the Z-pole. I think it's because we already have asymmetries in difermion production (eg. FCCee_mumu_Afb_240GeV). I think Alejo is the one who computed those ones if they are the ones you were thinking about.

[ecelada]

Hi @jacoterh, thanks for this! I think the reason why we didn't implement them is simply that these projections at 161 were not given in snowmass and the PBB. The final implementation of difermion is by Alejo, there should be a nb so we can just change the beam energy

[jacoterh]

Thanks for adding the theory covmat @moatms! Regarding the AFB, indeed, I have in mind the FCCee_ff_Afb_240GeV implementation, but at 161 GeV instead of 240 GeV. We have the experimental projections available in Fig. 1 of https://repository.cern/records/3rj9z-94994, so we can easily implement them by changing the beam energy in @arossia94's notebook

[jacoterh]

@moatms I've added now also the AFB observables at 161 GeV. Could you take care of the theory uncertainties again? Thanks!

[moatms]

@jacoterh In the ff_AFB files we don't include theory uncertainties because the projections for ff production are not the in the BB

[jacoterh]

I see it now, thanks, so the implementation is actually already good as is!

[ecelada]

I made checks on projections and theoretical predictions and didn't find any issue so I will approve this, keeping in mind that for LEP3 they are still missing