Project

General

Profile

Kaon LT Meetings » mtg_23jun01.txt

Garth Huber, 06/13/2023 06:14 AM

 
1
pionLT/kaonLT meeting minutes. June 1, 2023
2

    
3
Nathan:
4

    
5
Working on finalizing HMS Cherenkov calibration, but analyzed wrong setting
6
accidentally. Will come back to this next week.
7

    
8
Working on SHMS NGC calibration.  Petr's code doesn't work out of the box since
9
it was developed for aerogel detector.  Since it needs to be modified anyway,
10
working on re-writing to make it easier to read and maintain. Not quite
11
working yet, but in progress.
12

    
13
Junaid:
14

    
15
Completed course-related work.  Back to work on the SHMS drift chamber
16
calibrations. The HMS is complete for 2021 and 2022 data.
17

    
18
DG asks if there's a calibration status page somewhere (on the Redmine I guess).
19
There isn't now, but might happen in the future.
20

    
21
Vijay:
22

    
23
Looking at Lumi runs from summer 2019 (only took data at 2.7 GeV).  Took
24
pre-scaled singles (no coincidences) using coincidence DAQ.  EDTM interpretation
25
might be challenging because of this.  At the moment, significant rate
26
dependence in the tracked yields.  Looking at scalers might rule out simple
27
problems, like BCM calibration issues.
28

    
29
Richard:
30

    
31
More Lumi discussion - showed SHMS/HMS plots from last week.  This week, looked
32
at rate dependence of coincidence yield for 1 setting (I failed to write down
33
kinematics) - no apparent rate dependence, but rates were pretty low (<1 kHZ).
34
DG suggests looking at a higher rate setting also where effects might be larger.
35

    
36
Still working on large root file issue.
37

    
38
Will move on to implementation of SHMS HGC acceptance dependent cuts/efficiency.
39

    
40
Ali:
41

    
42
Working on Heep analysis.  A momentum offset of -0.14% in PHMS and -0.25% in
43
PSHMS seems to work well for W for Ebeam=10.6 GeV and 6.2 GeV.  Other
44
observables (Em, Pmx, Pmz) are improved, but still not optimal.  8.2 GeV
45
has very large W/Em offsets - not sure why. Things to look at for that:
46
1. Beam energy compared to HALLC:p (looked at this during the meeting -
47
looks ok)
48
2. Kinematic database (wrong P in standard.kinematics?)
49

    
50
Note that at Ebeam=10.6 GeV, HMS well into saturation - this might mean we can't
51
use one momentum offset for full momentum range.  Tanja notes that since that
52
setting uses a different set of matrix elements, that might have some impact.
53

    
54
DG asked for table of offsets for all variables, as well as kinematics.
55

    
56
Alicia: Downloaded and built PARTONS program (framework?). Model results to
57
come.  Will proceed with analysis with present t-binning - will need to
58
revisit once kinematics offsets are determined.
59

    
60

    
(244-244/413)