1
|
Aug 24/23 PionLT/KaonLT Analysis Meeting Notes
|
2
|
----------------------------------------------
|
3
|
(Notes by GH & AH)
|
4
|
|
5
|
Today: KaonLT will be discussed first
|
6
|
|
7
|
Please remember to post your slides at:
|
8
|
https://redmine.jlab.org/projects/kltexp/wiki/Kaon_LT_Meetings
|
9
|
|
10
|
Present
|
11
|
-------
|
12
|
Regina - Garth Huber, Muhammad Junaid, Vijay Kumar, Nacer Hamdi
|
13
|
JLab - Dave Gaskell
|
14
|
CUA - Richard Trotta
|
15
|
CSULA - Konrad Aniol
|
16
|
|
17
|
Richard Updates
|
18
|
---------------
|
19
|
Finalizing the luminosity studies
|
20
|
- trying to reproduce PeterB's LH2 boiling study
|
21
|
- that study used yield from ELCLEAN scalers, for Q2=5.5, W=3.02,
|
22
|
high-epsilon data
|
23
|
- applying strict current cuts, and subtracting EDTM from ELCLEAN scaler
|
24
|
- PB said he got a 0.3%/100uA correction
|
25
|
- confusing results on relative yields, while using ELCLEAN yields
|
26
|
|
27
|
- shows old plot of HMS Rel Yield vs Rate (LH2 lumi scan data)
|
28
|
- Yields: Carbon looks good, but hydrogen have some outliers, discussion on
|
29
|
reducing the error bars
|
30
|
- DG: probably best to only consider kinematics where pi- are below HMS
|
31
|
Cerenkov threshold
|
32
|
- consider to eliminate P_HMS=6.2, 5.7 GeV/c data
|
33
|
- recheck pi- leakthrough for 4.2 GeV/c data, and adjust Cer cuts
|
34
|
|
35
|
- request to Vijay where new fortran scripts are for average_kinematics and yields
|
36
|
|
37
|
Vijay Updates
|
38
|
-------------
|
39
|
Low Q2 efficiencies & livetime
|
40
|
- tracking eff vs S1X looks good
|
41
|
- EDTM-LT vs. SHMS-3/4 trigger rate
|
42
|
- LT fairly flat >99% until ~3 kHz, then linear drop
|
43
|
|
44
|
- SHMS-3/4 trigger eff vs rate
|
45
|
- observe ~97% efficiency for low rate (forward angle) runs, and 99% for most others
|
46
|
- DG: check the first runs that show weird low efficency, they may be low
|
47
|
momentum, or different conditions
|
48
|
- the problem with getting this trigger eff directly from hcana is that
|
49
|
it requires some study
|
50
|
- depends on matching of paddle hits w/ track, needs turning of slop
|
51
|
parameter in the match
|
52
|
- would generally expect SHMS-3/4 >99%
|
53
|
- *look* at S1X,Y,S2X,Y planes separately
|
54
|
- S2Y are vertically-oriented quartz bars, could be less efficient at
|
55
|
lower momentum
|
56
|
- *plot* each plane efficiency vs. SHMS_momentum to see if it's a real
|
57
|
effect, or not
|
58
|
|
59
|
Junaid Updates
|
60
|
--------------
|
61
|
HMS calorimeter calibs
|
62
|
- finished HMS calorimeter calibration for 2021
|
63
|
- still woring on pionLT run 2022
|
64
|
- new faster method: ran sripts on all 2021 data, and ran script to find
|
65
|
deviation and whether a new calib is needed
|
66
|
- expecting 2022 to be done soon, then will move on to SHMS calor calibs, for
|
67
|
negative polarity data only
|
68
|
|
69
|
Garth discussion on Heep Offsets
|
70
|
--------------------------------
|
71
|
Reviews Ali's out-of-plane offsets study from 23-May-18
|
72
|
- plots mean xptar difference between data and SIMC using formula in Tanja thesis
|
73
|
- HMS has a larger shift than SHMS, contributes most of the offset
|
74
|
- reproduces Ali's plot, where it is unclear whether the 3.8 or the 6.2,8.2
|
75
|
data are outliers
|
76
|
- GH getting data from Vijay's Summer-2019 Heep study to add to Ali's plot,
|
77
|
this will hopefully shed light on the issue
|
78
|
|
79
|
Reviews Vijay's in-plane offsets study from 23-Aug-17
|
80
|
- in-plane offsets should be largely independent of out-of-plane offsets
|
81
|
- DG: can let beam energy float within the quoted uncertainty on ARC energy
|
82
|
measurement
|
83
|
- DG: did Vijay do a global chi-square minimization?
|
84
|
- no, each energy was done separately
|
85
|
- GH will write a program that includes the derivatives and Vijay's input
|
86
|
data and do a global minimization
|
87
|
|
88
|
Next Meeting
|
89
|
------------
|
90
|
- Thur Aug 31 @ 16:00 Eastern/14:00 Regina/13:00 Pacific
|
91
|
- PionLT will go first
|