1
|
Feb 29/24 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 - Nathan Heinrich, Muhammad Junaid, Ali Usman, Garth Huber, Vijay Kumar,
|
13
|
Nacer Hamdi, Alicia Postuma
|
14
|
CUA - Richard Trotta, Casey Morean
|
15
|
JLab - Dave Gaskell
|
16
|
FIU - Pete Markowitz
|
17
|
|
18
|
Richard
|
19
|
-------
|
20
|
- PhD thesis has now been submitted to the committee for review.
|
21
|
Congratulations on this milestone!
|
22
|
|
23
|
LT-Iteration Script Issues
|
24
|
- uncertainties for unseparated d2sigma behave weirdly when iterating, while
|
25
|
the R=model/data ratios behave normally
|
26
|
- statistical errors on d2sigma get much smaller after an iteration
|
27
|
- clearly there is still a bug somewhere
|
28
|
- GH: it sounds like the way the R-error is propagated to d2sig-error is the
|
29
|
issue
|
30
|
|
31
|
Plots of d2sigma vs phi are shown for various settings at high, low epsilon
|
32
|
- a MM cut is now applied: 1.1<MM<1.18
|
33
|
- Q2=3.0, W=2.32 is particularly weird, low epsilon significantly larger than
|
34
|
high epsilon
|
35
|
- for this setting P_HMS=6.6 GeV/c, so maybe that's a hint
|
36
|
- Ali: the Heep offsets for this setting over-correct the MM peak, i.e. moves
|
37
|
it too far
|
38
|
|
39
|
Plots of sigL, sigT vs t shown
|
40
|
- for some settings -sigL is plotted instead of sigL, due to the low
|
41
|
epsilon>high epsilon issue
|
42
|
- clearly this will need significantly more investigation
|
43
|
|
44
|
Ali
|
45
|
---
|
46
|
- was sick last week, only getting back on track now
|
47
|
|
48
|
Clean pi+,p data for Richard's PID leakage subtractions
|
49
|
- finished analyzing pi+ for 3 of 5 kinematics, data ready for RT subtraction
|
50
|
- proton will be done soon
|
51
|
- no HGC cut used at all
|
52
|
- RT will apply the HGC hole cut to his sample, confirms that it will be
|
53
|
straightforward to implement
|
54
|
- RT still has to resolve the 5cm HGC hole cut shift issue reported a few
|
55
|
weeks ago
|
56
|
- RT thinks the x_HGC, y_HGC coordinates were not implemented correctly,
|
57
|
will return to this soon
|
58
|
|
59
|
Resuming SIMC resolution study, nothing to report yet
|
60
|
|
61
|
Alicia
|
62
|
------
|
63
|
HMS-delta correction update
|
64
|
- had a discussion with DaveG a few days ago, after finding that application of
|
65
|
DG's delta-correction did not yield the expected improvement to MM resolution
|
66
|
- found that DG's MM calc was based on the old 6GeV/ENGINE formula
|
67
|
- Alicia is using hcana calculation, and this appears to be the cause of the
|
68
|
difference
|
69
|
- DG is trying to figure out what exactly is different between the two MM
|
70
|
calculations
|
71
|
- hcana: takes x',y' and spectrometer angles, converts to spherical theta,phi
|
72
|
and calculates PM components
|
73
|
- ENGINE: calculates PM components in spectrometer x',y' system and converts
|
74
|
to target coordinates, but does not use spherical coordinates at any step
|
75
|
- DG: calc in hcana is harder to follow, can't see where the difference is,
|
76
|
in principle both calculations should be equivalent
|
77
|
- AP: tried to recalculate MM on her own, also agreed that old method is
|
78
|
easier to understand
|
79
|
- her calculation does not fully reproduce hcana either
|
80
|
|
81
|
- Alicia shows a plot from script, sees no correlation between delta and hsxpfp
|
82
|
for P_HMS<5 GeV/c
|
83
|
- Q2=2.1, W=2.95, P_HMS=5.292: starts to see a correlation
|
84
|
- Q2=3.0, W=2.32, P_HMS=6.59: a definite curved correlation is seen
|
85
|
- will have to apply a correction for these two settings, but it needs to be
|
86
|
different than what DG had found
|
87
|
- DG: for P_HMS=6.59, are we 100% sure we're using the correct Matrix
|
88
|
Elements for this setting?
|
89
|
- Ali goes to check, confirms that the correct ME are used for both his and
|
90
|
Alicia's analyses
|
91
|
- Jacob was looking at finalizing the high HMS momenta ME, Holly is looking
|
92
|
at higher P_H MS w/NPS students
|
93
|
- clearly there is an issue that needs further optimization
|
94
|
|
95
|
- Implementing the HMS-delta correction for high P_HMS
|
96
|
- DG: can't just correct MM, all kinematics are affected, in principle will
|
97
|
affect the t-binning for these settings, as events will migrate from one
|
98
|
bin to another
|
99
|
- rather than Alicia continuing with her reconstruction script, it will be
|
100
|
better to modify hcana to include the correction for high P_HMS, so that
|
101
|
all kinematics are handled consistently
|
102
|
- DG: suggests fitting a quadratic, but only apply to a certain region of the
|
103
|
HMS focal plane
|
104
|
- Alicia: maybe a piece-wise linear function? Will think about what works
|
105
|
best
|
106
|
- *CONCLUSION* Alicia will first determine the needed delta correction then
|
107
|
implement in hcana
|
108
|
|
109
|
Vijay
|
110
|
-----
|
111
|
- Just returned from EIC workshop in India, starting analysis again and yield
|
112
|
ratios
|
113
|
|
114
|
Shows interesting Lattice QCD calculation from workshop
|
115
|
- Swagato Mukherjee (BNL), Q.Shi will be first author, not yet submitted
|
116
|
- LQCD calc for both pi+ and K+ to Q2~35
|
117
|
- calc indicates that both Q2*Fpi and Q2*Fk will remain high through the full
|
118
|
Q2 range, with no significant decrease to pQCD curve
|
119
|
- not surprisingly, the Lattice errors are fairly large
|
120
|
- we definitely need to keep a look out for the final calculation
|
121
|
|
122
|
Nathan
|
123
|
------
|
124
|
Working on PionLT Lumi study and plots for the SHMS NIM paper
|
125
|
- looking at what PID cuts to apply for the Lumi study, which also generates
|
126
|
the needed plots for the paper
|
127
|
- SHMS single arm e' Lumi scan
|
128
|
- NGC vs Calorimeter
|
129
|
- NGC vs Aerogel
|
130
|
- NGC vs HGC
|
131
|
- GH: suggests to apply NGC vs Calor cut and look at the others with this cut
|
132
|
applied to see what is removed before deciding whether the other plots add
|
133
|
anything extra to the PID selection (useful also for the paper)
|
134
|
|
135
|
- HGC, NGC efficiencies vs delta
|
136
|
- efficiency plots vs X_cer still in progress
|
137
|
|
138
|
- HGC, NGC, Aerogel 2D efficiency plots vs X,Y_FP
|
139
|
- see hole in the HGC, NGC and tray boundaries in Aerogel
|
140
|
|
141
|
- LH+ production data PID plots shown
|
142
|
- LD- also quickly looked at, sees large e- peak in SHMS
|
143
|
|
144
|
Next Steps:
|
145
|
- make sure sure Lumi script is working properly
|
146
|
- RT will meet with Nathan separately to go over what changes he needs to
|
147
|
make to Lumi script
|
148
|
- In addition to changes since 2021, Nathan will have to modify the script to
|
149
|
handle Lumi runs where only one arm data at a time (should be straightforward)
|
150
|
- apply proper cuts on data ranges
|
151
|
|
152
|
Junaid
|
153
|
------
|
154
|
Working on PionLT efficiency studies
|
155
|
- investigating outlier runs, removed bad runs from plots
|
156
|
- most of these had beam trip issues
|
157
|
- also some runs with quadrupole trips
|
158
|
- DG: how do you remove these runs from the analysis?
|
159
|
- run list is modified, so these runs will never be replayed in future jobs
|
160
|
|
161
|
- tracking efficiency studies nearly complete
|
162
|
- generating beam cut files from replays
|
163
|
- will be included in future replays
|
164
|
|
165
|
Heep-check analysis preliminaries
|
166
|
- looked closely at the kinematics for all Heep-Coin settings in 2021-22
|
167
|
- selected 9 of the 16 settings for further study, based on the angle and
|
168
|
momentum settings
|
169
|
- GH: the other 7 settings will be kept in reserve for a future student to
|
170
|
look at
|
171
|
- did not look at list of Heep-singles runs yet, it's a very large list of
|
172
|
settings
|
173
|
- will first look at the Heep-coin results and from there decide which
|
174
|
Heep-singles settings are helpful to look at
|
175
|
|
176
|
Nacer
|
177
|
-----
|
178
|
Efficiency studies for 3.8, 4.9 GeV KaonLT data
|
179
|
- Plot of CPULT vs COIN trigger rate
|
180
|
- sharp drop off seen above 2.8 kHz
|
181
|
- looked at the outlier run near 2.8 kHz, where the CPULT relation kink
|
182
|
- no comment in run sheet, will look next at hclog
|
183
|
- DG: are the rates corrected for the beam off time?
|
184
|
- will have to look more closely into this
|
185
|
|
186
|
- Plot of SHMS_pion_sing_TrkEff
|
187
|
- vs SHMS_3/4 trigger rate
|
188
|
- 2 outliers seen
|
189
|
- vs S1X rate
|
190
|
- 3 outliers seen
|
191
|
|
192
|
Next Meeting
|
193
|
------------
|
194
|
- Thur Mar 7 @ 15:00 Eastern/14:00 Regina
|
195
|
- PionLT will go first
|
196
|
|
197
|
- USA daylight savings switch is following week
|
198
|
- meeting time will remain at 15:00 Eastern, which switches to 13:00 Regina
|
199
|
- GH will send Zoom invitations up to end of August
|
200
|
|
201
|
|