1

Jul 11/24 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, Alicia Postuma, Nathan Heinrich, Zach Sullivan,

13

Nacer Hamdi, Muhammad Junaid, Vijay KUmar

14

CSULA  Konrad Aniol

15

JLab  Dave Gaskell

16

FIU  Pete Markowitz

17

Virginia  Richard Trotta

18

CUA  Tanja Horn

19

Ohio  Julie Roche

20


21

Vijay

22



23

Low Q2 PionLT Systematic Studies

24

 SHMS acceptance cuts +/10%

25

 delta, xptar, yptar changed together

26

 variations in L,T,LT,TT are small

27

 Dave: you should change the cut in each variable one at a time

28

 want to treat the uncertainties in each variable as uncorrelated, and

29

then add them in quadrature

30

 changing all variables simultaneously implies the 3 quantities are

31

correlated

32

 *NB* this means 6 changes in total for each spectrometer

33


34

 changing sigLT functional form in LTfit

35

 Exp/MC ratios at high epsilon have a pronounced cos(phi) dependence

36

 will modify functional form to see effect

37

 currently have sigLT=(A*exp(Bt)+C/t)*sin(theta*)*g(W)

38

 the C/t term was not in functions used in prior papers, will try just C as

39

a fit constant

40


41

Richard

42



43

High Q2 KaonLT LTfitting

44

 using sigL=(P1+P2*logQ2)*exp(P3*t), sigT=(p5*(t/Q21))*exp(P6*t)

45

 using same sigLT equation as Vijay

46

 will show only 1st iteration for all settings

47

 will concentrate on lower t region now to try to get a good fit, but will

48

need to do full trange later for Kpole tests

49


50

 given these caveats, initial sigL,T shown for:

51

Q2=2.115,W=2.95 Q2=3.0,W=3.14 Q2=5.5, W=3.02

52

 will look at replacing (t/Q21) term in sigT with (t/Q2P7)

53


54

 Dave: Exp/MC ratios have some weird sin(phi) dependence, implies something

55

very weird is going on, not just an interference function issue

56

 Garth: suggests doing a few more iterations and plotting P1P6 vs Q2 to see

57

what kind of Q2depenence results

58

 *NB* then use this info as feedback for what kind of fuctional form to try

59

 Henk and GH used this approach in Fpi1 pi/pi+ analysis and it was useful

60


61

Alicia

62



63

pi+ BSA analysis

64

 some comments have been received on the paper. <10% of collaboration has

65

responded

66

 shows slides for Monday's presentation for comment

67


68

Nacer

69



70

KaonLT Heep Exp/MC ratios

71

 *NB* will try modifying Heep model in SIMC to see if this helps higher beam

72

energies

73

 GH will send the routine that Bill used in his thesis

74


75

Nathan and Zach

76



77

PionLT Lumi Studies

78

 HMS, SHMS carbon scans 1673816746

79

 changed BCM offset by 9nA (0.025uA > 0.034ua) and low current dependence

80

looks flatter now

81

 reduced chisquare is calculated for different fits of rel.yield versus

82

beam current

83

 adding a slope results in overfit (too small chisquare), while a flat line

84

fit gives chisquare closer to 1 (although as low as ~0.5 for some plots)

85

 *NB* conclusion is that carbon scans look good and flat. GOOD NEWS!!

86


87

 HMS LH2 scans 1670316712

88

 high current point is much lower than the others, there is at least 1

89

outlier, maybe two

90

 would imply little boiling at low current, with significantly more boiling

91

at 80uA

92

 no fits to rel.yield versus beam current are good, chisquare bad for both

93

flat fit and linear drop

94


95

 investigating possible problems:

96

 Total Live Time (TLT) shows linear drop to 92% at 120 kHz

97

 CPULT also drops linearly, but is ~80% at low rate instead of ~100%

98

 need to recheck how CPULT is calculated, might be including DTM events

99

 Dave: you should be able to form CPULT for different trigger legs

100

 *NB* this used to be in the report files, take a look at an old version

101

of the template for the calculation

102


103

 SHMS LH2 scans 1675916764

104

 larger errors than the HMS scan but looks similar

105

 notably, the highest 80uA point is an outlier here too (although perhaps

106

not by as much)

107


108

 GH: *NB* suggest to add a small quadratic term to fit versus current

109

 since both spectrometers see similar behavior, it might be real

110


111

 Dave: target fan speed seemed to change a lot in early 12 GeV expts, makes a

112

big difference to the LH2/LD2 boiling, so that's why different early

113

experiments repot large variation in observed boiling

114

 Tanja: *NB* Josh did a study of target characteristics versus fan speed,

115

try to get a copy of his report

116


117

 2021 Lumi scans

118

 Zach starting to set up for doing the 2021 scans

119

 Nathan reports that the analysis script should hopefully work for 2

120

spectrometer singles runs, as it is based off Richard's original script

121

 it would be helpful to see how different the results are, partly to

122

establish the systematic uncertainty in the Lumi scans

123


124

 Coin Lumi scans were also taken in PionLT

125

 Nathan's old code would have to be fixed for these studies

126


127

Junaid

128



129

PionLT HeeP studies

130

 results for all 9 settings shown

131

 includes offsets from Garth and Nathan's BCM calib

132

 Richard has sent new version of recon_hcana script, will check if this

133

makes any changes

134


135

 5.988 GeV energy Exp/MC distribution comparisons look quite good

136

 6.399 GeV Ratio<1 by about 1.5 sigma

137

 7.942 GeV Ratio=1.118

138

 8.483 GeV Ratio=1.147

139

 9.177 GeV Ratio=1.261

140

 9.884 GeV Ratio=1.156

141

 10.547 GeV Ratio=1.232

142

 clearly a systematic trend to the ratios (with some noticeable fluctuation)

143

 rechecking error calculation on the ratios

144


145

 proton absorption correction not yet implemented to Exp yields, but this is

146

expected to make the ratios worse

147


148

 there is an issue with 2 of the Dummy Target runs

149

 very small number of events after replay

150

 got same answer for both RH7, ALMA9 versions of hcana

151

 gets a map warning when doing replay, consulting w/ Mark Jones on this

152


153

Next Meeting

154



155

 Next meet: Thur July 18 @ 15:00 Eastern/13:00 Regina

156

 PionLT will go first

157


158


159


160


161


162


163


164


165

