1
|
Apr 18/24 PionLT/KaonLT Analysis Meeting Notes
|
2
|
----------------------------------------------
|
3
|
(Notes by GH)
|
4
|
|
5
|
Today: PionLT 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, Nathan Heinrich, Ali Usman, Vijay Kumar, Nacer Hamdi,
|
13
|
Alicia Postuma
|
14
|
CUA - Tanja Horn, Casey Morean
|
15
|
UVa - Richard Trotta
|
16
|
York - Stephen Kay
|
17
|
CSULA - Konrad Aniol
|
18
|
|
19
|
Nathan
|
20
|
------
|
21
|
PionLT BCM calibrations
|
22
|
- met with Dave Mack on Monday to learn how to do the calibrations
|
23
|
- things going very well, made some improvements to Dave's scripts
|
24
|
- waiting for feedback from Dave Mack on results NH analysis
|
25
|
|
26
|
The steps:
|
27
|
- do a scaler replay of BCM calib runs
|
28
|
- pick beam on/off times
|
29
|
- do a fit of BCM frequency vs Unser current
|
30
|
- look at fit residuals, and exclude outliers
|
31
|
|
32
|
Initial results:
|
33
|
- it looks likely that BCM slopes and intercepts can be combined for periods
|
34
|
where the physical configuration (PreAmp setup, tune) did not change
|
35
|
- BCM2 intercept and slope looks pretty stable
|
36
|
- DaveM thinks BCM4A is most reliable, as it generally has less non-linearity
|
37
|
at high current
|
38
|
- KaonLT used BCM4A and BCM1
|
39
|
- BCM4B is optimized for low current, saturates above 40uA, so calib will be
|
40
|
done only for lower current portion of scans
|
41
|
- Nathan will make a write-up on changes to code and instructions
|
42
|
|
43
|
Richard
|
44
|
-------
|
45
|
mc_recon script changes
|
46
|
- as shown last week, there was an offset to some kinematic distributions
|
47
|
because the recon script was using proton mass (left over from Heep) rather
|
48
|
than K+ mass
|
49
|
- after the fix, MM VS yptar correlations look similar for data + MC
|
50
|
- some odd looking correlation between MM and xptar shown(!)
|
51
|
|
52
|
pi+ leakthrough subtraction
|
53
|
- now using an HGC cut, K+Lambda peak in pi+ sample is eliminated
|
54
|
- investigated variations to pi+ spectrum when varying HGC cut
|
55
|
- no significant changes seen for NPE>1.5 to 3.0
|
56
|
- also looked at variations in Aerogel cut
|
57
|
|
58
|
initial iteration results (Q2=3.0, W=3.14 only)
|
59
|
- sigL seems to have a fairly small Q2-dependence within the diamond
|
60
|
- t-dependence still not right yet
|
61
|
- using exp(-t+0.2), will need to adjust the +0.2 offset in the exponent
|
62
|
|
63
|
- GH: the MMk spectrum after pi+ leakthrough subtraction looks nicely clean
|
64
|
now, suggest that you try fitting the SIMC K+Lambda and K+Sigma peaks to the
|
65
|
pi+ subtracted MMk data
|
66
|
- the K+Sigma peak sits on top of K+Lambda radiative tail, it would be good
|
67
|
to see what the comparison looks like
|
68
|
|
69
|
Alicia
|
70
|
------
|
71
|
- making plots for the BSA paper
|
72
|
- CoinTime, MM data vs SIMC w/cuts shown
|
73
|
- sample asymmetries vs phi for Q2=3.0, W=3.14 (2nd highest stats setting)
|
74
|
|
75
|
BSA xB dependence
|
76
|
- last week we saw there is nearly no Q2-dep to LT', so it was suggested to
|
77
|
explore the xB dependence by fixing -t (but not Q2)
|
78
|
- plots of LT' vs xB shown at -t=0.17, 0.27, 0.31, 0.36
|
79
|
- 0.17: shows an interesting trend, all of these points are in similar
|
80
|
Q2-range
|
81
|
- 0.27, 0.31, 0.36: xB dependence is flatter, generally good agreement
|
82
|
between Hall C and CLAS results
|
83
|
- some discrepancy between Hall C and CLAS results at 0.27, which cannot be
|
84
|
traced to Q2-dependence, as both sets bracket similar Q2-ranges
|
85
|
- don't yet know whether will include in paper or not
|
86
|
- if we do, we probably won't compare to any theory curves
|
87
|
- since the Q2-dependence of the data is ignored when making these plots, and
|
88
|
the Q2-dep of the models differs from the data, this would be a messy
|
89
|
comparison
|
90
|
|
91
|
Ali
|
92
|
---
|
93
|
- last week saw that Q2=3.0, W=3.14 data at high -t had few piDelta events
|
94
|
- proposed to exclude highest -t region which had many fewer piDelta events
|
95
|
than background events
|
96
|
- similar study extended to other settings:
|
97
|
- Q2=3.0, W=2.32, one t-bin
|
98
|
- exclude events for -t>0.9, based on t-coverage of events in piDelta MM
|
99
|
cut
|
100
|
- Q2=4.4, W=2.74, one t-bin, exclude -t>1.0, region is tuned separately for
|
101
|
each setting, based on how the MM plot looks at high -t
|
102
|
- Q2=5.5, W=3.02, one t-bin, exclude -t>1.05
|
103
|
|
104
|
- Q2=5.5 phi-coverage
|
105
|
- found that the piDelta MC somehow changed phi-range to 0-2pi instead of -pi
|
106
|
to +pi
|
107
|
- fixes underway, but source of the problem is not yet understood
|
108
|
- one possibility is an issue with mc_recon
|
109
|
- Richard: the phi range in hcana is different than SIMC
|
110
|
- Ali: this is not the issue, that was already taken into account in the
|
111
|
code, this is a kinematics-dependent change
|
112
|
- Ali is still testing mc_recon script if it is using correct Mpi instead of Mp
|
113
|
|
114
|
|
115
|
Vijay
|
116
|
-----
|
117
|
- planning to show diagnostic plots next week on LT-separation
|
118
|
- full set of plots not ready yet
|
119
|
|
120
|
Nacer
|
121
|
-----
|
122
|
KaonLT Low Q2 Cut Efficiency studies
|
123
|
- RFtime vs MMk
|
124
|
- will use data to determine the fraction of excluded KLambda, KSigma events
|
125
|
excluded due to the RFtime cut
|
126
|
- since the pi+n MM region is clean, will select these events for the study,
|
127
|
under the assumption (seems reasonable) that the RFtime distribution is the
|
128
|
same for pi+ and K+, just shifted in phase
|
129
|
- apply same cuts (but shifted) to pi+n events as used for K+ selection
|
130
|
- get an efficiency of 0.987, high epsilon 4.9GeV data
|
131
|
- will have to repeat study for low epsilon data
|
132
|
|
133
|
HMS electron selection efficiency studies
|
134
|
- quick check using physics data, rather than Heep data
|
135
|
- For the Cherenkov, get an efficiency of 0.981, which still contains some
|
136
|
pi- contamination
|
137
|
- Ali: for higher Q2 KaonLT, the sample was not as clean, got efficiencies
|
138
|
as low as 0.75, even after using tight Calorimeter cuts to clean up the
|
139
|
event sample
|
140
|
- looks like it's good to use Ali's electron efficiencies
|
141
|
|
142
|
pi+ subtraction sample
|
143
|
- the idea is the same as Richard's, except that a very clean pi+ sample can be
|
144
|
obtained just by using a tight RFtime cut
|
145
|
- still need to normalize the pi+ sample to the leakthrough
|
146
|
- Richard: takes MMk region 0.89-0.93, scales to equalize integrals
|
147
|
|
148
|
Next Meeting
|
149
|
------------
|
150
|
- Thur April 25 @ 15:00 Eastern/13:00 Regina
|
151
|
- KaonLT will go first
|
152
|
|
153
|
|