Project

General

Profile

Kaon LT Meetings » mtg_23nov09.txt

Garth Huber, 11/09/2023 04:50 PM

 
1

    
2
                 Nov 9/23 PionLT/KaonLT Analysis Meeting Notes
3
                 ---------------------------------------------
4
                            (Notes by GH & AH)
5

    
6
                     Today: PionLT will be discussed first
7

    
8
Please remember to post your slides at:
9
https://redmine.jlab.org/projects/kltexp/wiki/Kaon_LT_Meetings
10

    
11
Present
12
-------
13
Regina - Garth Huber, Muhammad Junaid, Nacer Hamdi, Nathan Heinrich, Vijay
14
   Kumar, Alicia Postuma
15
FIU - Pete Markowitz
16
JLab - Dave Gaskell
17
CUA - Richard Trotta, Tanja Horn
18
  
19
Nathan
20
------
21
Making scripts to check RefTime cuts for CoinTimes, will need to do some debugging
22
- probably will need to check with Mark Jones on what variables to use
23

    
24
Junaid
25
------
26
Hodoscope calibrations
27
- last set of run numbers should be completed this afternoon
28
- 2021 run period: 3 parameter sets for SHMS, HMS only 1
29
- Summer 2022: only 1 set needed for each of SHMS, HMS
30
- will update param files and push to GitHub
31
- then will move to rechecking DC calibs
32

    
33
Richard
34
-------
35
Applying Heep in-plane offsets
36
- previously tried using Garth's 5-beam offsets with modified dPp
37
- briefly tried 3-beam offsets, prefers the 3-beam offsets, but no results
38
  shown
39
- EM has a systematic trend, looks good for 6.2 with offsets, worst for 10.6 GeV
40
- adjust SHMS dPp offset in ad-hoc way to improve EM, while heeping HMS dPe=0
41
- shows plots of W & EM with changing dPp.  W insensitive
42
- noticed that for momentum offset, in particular dPp-0.7%, makes the
43
  distributions, including Emiss, have a better match between MC vs. data
44
- also briefly showed some PM distributions: PMX doesn't change much, PMZ
45
  behaves similarly to EM
46
- applies offsets w/opposite sign, Vijay did as well
47
- DG: HMS and SHMS momentum offsets have similar action.  Did you try changing
48
  HMS dPe instead of SHMS dPp?
49
- GH: the SHMS momenta are not large for these Heep runs, P<5 GeV/c, so
50
  argument for saturation is not there
51
  - would feel more comfortable with a common (moderate) SHMS offset, and try
52
    to play around more with dE beam ofset
53
- DG: if you change dPe, then need to adjust beam dE to keep W fixed
54
- RT: we could try to keep SHMS at 0.1% and vary HMS momentum offset
55

    
56
Heep OOP offsets
57
- shows plot w/PMY offsets
58
- out of plane offsets dpphi and dhphi unfortunetly do not have much effect
59

    
60
Vijay
61
-----
62
Applied Heep OOP offset
63
- supposed to be same value that RT tried, but he sees a larger effect
64
- in fact, PMY is over-corrected, which indicates applied offset is too large,
65
  not too small
66
- RT and VK to discuss offline, maybe RT has a units issue?
67

    
68
Alicia
69
------
70
Summary of 10.6 GeV CoinTime corrections for Ali
71
- feedback from quarterly meeting  using the new variables to help with the
72
  CoinTime correction
73
- Mark Jones sent a short write-up on what variables to look at
74
- the first results using it are negative, but need to do more checks on
75
  whether implementing it correctly
76

    
77
Nacer
78
-----
79
3.8 GeV KaonLT beta distribution issue
80
- did a new replay on 3.8 GeV data, but Beta is still shifted to higher values
81
  - P.gtr.beta peaked at 1.1 and very broad
82
- maybe something not right in replay scripts, pointing to wrong calibrations?
83
  - NH will sit down with AH to look things over
84
- VK says he thought the 3.8 GeV beta distribution should be properly peaked
85

    
86
- Also tried an accidentals subtraction, seems to be over subtracting, so need
87
  to recheck
88

    
89
Garth
90
-----
91
Heep OOP offsets
92
- one of the feedbacks from Quarterly Analysis meeting was to separate
93
  out-off-plane offsets to three fits to get smaller offsets that match different
94
  beam energy sets
95
- showed result of revised fit, need to keep the SHMS offset fixed near zero
96
  and only refit HMS offset
97
  - for Vijay's data the offset would be slightly less than half of global
98
    value, the other beam energies would have values more similar to global fit
99

    
100
- DG: Still puzzling how is the offsets vary with beam energy, in other words
101
  the HMS offsets weirdly vary with the spectrometers postion
102
  - GH: agree this doesn't sound physical, but the uncertainties in the offsets
103
    appear to be large, so maybe the change is less significant than it seems
104
- PeteM: maybe it's the angle of the beam into the hall that is varying?
105
  - DG: these are 3 different beam periods, and the steering into the hall
106
    would be different each time, maybe PM is on to something
107
  - RT looked earlier at the beam position (so did GH), but not the angle
108
  - DG needs a ROOT file w/BPM position info
109
    - RT: Below is the location of our replays as well as the run lists for the
110
      kaonLT data periods
111
      /lustre19/expphy/cache/hallc/kaonlt/Dec_2022/Analysis/KaonLT
112
    - Run numbers:
113
      Fall 2018: https://redmine.jlab.org/attachments/548/kaonlt_runlist.csv
114
      Spring 2019:
115
  https://redmine.jlab.org/attachments/768/kaonlt_runlist_8p2-6p2.csv
116

    
117

    
118
Next Meeting
119
------------
120
- Thur Nov 16 @ 15:00 Eastern/14:00 Regina
121
  - KaonLT will go first
(312-312/430)