Project

General

Profile

Kaon LT Meetings » mtg_24feb15.txt

Garth Huber, 02/16/2024 05:34 PM

 
1
                 Feb 15/24 PionLT/KaonLT Analysis Meeting Notes
2
                 ----------------------------------------------
3
                                (Notes by GH)
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, Ali Usman, Muhammad Junaid, Nathan Heinrich, 
13
   Alicia Postuma, Nacer Hamdi
14
JLab - Dave Gaskell
15
York - Stephen Kay
16
CUA - Casey Morean, Richard Trotta, Tanja Horn
17
FIU - Pete Markowitz
18
CSULA - Konrad Aniol
19

    
20
Richard
21
-------
22
Updated Efficiencies
23
- needed to fix used HMS Cherenkov and Calorimeter Effs in Effective Charge
24
  script
25
  Now using: hcer eff=0.9730 unc=0.0006
26
             hcal eff=0.9961 unc=0.0005
27

    
28
Fixed issue with Data/MC average ratios script
29
- was over-writing ratio values w/ just ones from Center Setting in
30
  average_ratios.f
31
  - this means Left and Right settings were not included
32
  - of course this makes a big difference to the phi-coverage at higher -t
33

    
34
- a short discussion followed on the optimal number of t,phi bins to use, how
35
  many is too many?
36
  - the important issue is to have sufficient statistical significance to
37
    distinguish a potentially small sig_L from zero
38
  - From the online KaonLT statistics, GH had estimated #t-bins (K+Lambda):
39
    Q2=0.50  x=0.09  5 t-bins
40
       2.115 x=0.21  5 t-bins
41
       3.00  x=0.25  5 t-bins
42
       3.00  x=0.40  2 t-bins
43
       4.40  x=0.40  2 t-bins
44
       5.50  x=0.40  2 t-bins
45
    This is only an approximate guide, might need fewer bins to have good
46
    L/T-separation
47
  - using 10 phi bins now.  Seems appropriate.  pi+ channel can probably use 16
48
    bins.
49

    
50
Corrections to calculation of statistical uncertainties
51
- had a long discussion w/ Ali, a second meeting with GH
52
- reviewed equations from T.Horn and W.Li theses
53
- for Q2=2.115 delta-R_bin: 5-10%, and dY_data_bin~dY_simc_bin
54
  - surprised SIMC errors aren't smaller, given #evnts generated, will
55
    investigate further
56

    
57
Aerogel/HGC cuts in SIMC
58
- aerogel tray cut applied in recon_hcana, while HGC cut is applied in
59
  lt_analysis
60
  - the HGC cut is arranged this way to be more consistent w/ data analysis
61
- comparing data & SMC x,y_HGC plots w/ hole cut
62
  - sees a 10cm X-shift in HGC cut compared to Vijay
63
    GH: perhaps RT and VK are projecting to different z_HGC locations?
64

    
65
Pion/proton leakage subtraction script
66
- GH: need to use pi+ data instead of simulation, since the K+L peak lies above
67
  the Delta0pi+ and inclusive region, pi+n simulation would only include
68
  radiative tail and none of these other contributions, would then have to run
69
  multiple SIMC generators to get all of the contributions, making for a much
70
  more complicated fit
71
- This is even more important for K+Sigma extraction!
72

    
73
Unseparated XSect systematic studies
74
- met with TH to discuss systematic error table
75
- nice table listed on what cuts to vary for each systematic study
76
  Tracking: compare pruning and chi-square methods
77
  Acceptance: vary acceptance cuts
78
  PID: compare high, low epsilon HGC hole cuts
79
  Kinematics: vary angle, momentum, energy offsets
80
  MC Model: vary fit model parameters from final iteration values
81
  Radiative Tail: SIMC w/ and w/o rad flag
82

    
83
Issues w/ generating new parameterization
84
- now that L,R,C ratios issue fixed, things starting to look good
85
- initial indications is that t-dependence in the model is wrong
86
  - will try removing t-dependence to sigT
87

    
88
Ali
89
---
90
Optimizing SIMC MM resolution
91
- high epsilon 10.6GeV data have worst resolution mismatch
92
- using data dists from most recent full pass replay, incl TOF-CT leakage
93
  correction and offsets
94
- SIMC also offset corrected
95
  - initial plots only for SIMC resolution tuning
96
  - Dave's delta correction not included
97
- shows plots for central settings only, expect L,R to be very similar
98
- one SHMS resolution tuning parameter used for all kinematics
99
  - Q2=3.0 W=2.32 HMS=6.58 - mismatch is fairly large here
100
  - Q2=5.5 W=3.03 HMS=3.26 - best resolution agreement
101

    
102
- shows t-binned Q2=5.5 plots from Alicia
103
  - overall, the agreement is better now
104
  - definitely see a t-dependence to the discrepancy, so the t-binned plots
105
    will be vital for determining a final correction
106

    
107
- added HMS DC resolution correction from Abhyuday
108
  - didn't see any significant improvement for Q2=3.0 W=2.32 center
109

    
110
- DG: how much is the SHMS resolution changed by?
111
  - a multiplicative factor is used in SIMC, 9x
112
  - seems very high!
113
- Nacer: asks some questions about the pi+n SIMC model
114
- GH: it would be valuable to check 1-2 low epsilon settings where P_HMS is
115
   lower
116
- Nacer: any final discrepancy between data and MC agreement should end up
117
   being quoted as part of the Model systematic error
118
   - GH agrees with this
119

    
120
Alicia
121
------
122
Recap of BSA analysis status
123
- need to implement Dave's delta-correction and troubleshoot
124
- then rerun BSA calc, mean kin, cut dependence scripts
125
- will arrange a separate future meeting to discuss error propagation
126
- then finalize Q2-scans at fixed xB including Hall B data
127
- goal of distributing draft paper by end of March
128

    
129
Troubleshooting delta-correction
130
- delta_corr=hsdelta+6.0*hsxpfp
131
- Problem: finding that MM resolution w/o correction is worse than from hcana
132
  - DG: to do a quick check, used an old script which calculated MM like old
133
    6GeV ENGINE
134
    - should use Richard's recon script instead, which has same MM formulas as
135
      hcana
136
    - the issue is that hcana has improved corrections for xtar dependence
137
      compared to ENGINE, since longer target lenghts are used in 12GeV running
138
      compared to 6GeV
139

    
140
- sees an improvement when the delta-correction is applied, but will need to
141
  redo the study due to different MM calc than hcana
142
  - Ali will also have to retune SHMS resolution study after Alicia is done her
143
    study
144

    
145
- Alicia's t-binning plots at Q2=4.4 shows that Ali's 9x resolution factor is
146
  too big
147
  - would like SIMC to never be wider than data, for any t-bin
148

    
149
Nacer
150
-----
151
DC calibs
152
- pushed changes to GitHub
153
  - Junaid should check things over before accepting
154
  - maybe Ali can look things over as well, as he's more familiar with KaonLT
155
    layout
156
- hoping to submit full replay over weekend
157

    
158
Nathan
159
------
160
- catching up on things after being RC
161
- BCM param map now set up
162
- hoping to have some Lumi plots next week
163
  - will start with the robust singles study from end of PionLT run
164

    
165
Junaid
166
------
167
Tracking Eff study
168
- plots of EDTM, Elec_sing_TrkEff, Elec_COIN_TrkEff, Hodo3/4Eff for HMS
169
  - a small number of outlier runs (eff=0) that need checking, but overall
170
    looks good, with reasonably tight, monotonic trends vs rate
171
- similar plots for SHMS
172
  - also a few outliers that need checking
173
- pTRIG6 runs for HMS also shown
174
  - these were for the ELREAL trigger efficiency study
175
- HeepCoin data plots
176
  - plot of SHMS >1MHz Hodo rate shows sharper drop off of eff at very high
177
    rate
178

    
179
Next Meeting
180
------------
181
- Thur Feb 22 @ 15:00 Eastern/14:00 Regina
182
  - PionLT will go first
183

    
184

    
185

    
186

    
187

    
188

    
189

    
190

    
191

    
192

    
193

    
194

    
(371-371/413)