|
1
|
Jan 30/25 PionLT/KaonLT Analysis Meeting Notes
|
|
2
|
----------------------------------------------
|
|
3
|
(Notes by GH)
|
|
4
|
|
|
5
|
Today: KaonLT will be discussed first
|
|
6
|
|
|
7
|
Present
|
|
8
|
-------
|
|
9
|
Regina - Garth Huber, Nacer Hamdi, Nathan Heinrich, Vijay Kumar,
|
|
10
|
Muhammad Junaid, Alicia Postuma, Ali Usman
|
|
11
|
JLab - Dave Gaskell
|
|
12
|
CUA - Tanja Horn
|
|
13
|
Ohio - Julie Roche
|
|
14
|
FIU - Pete Markowitz
|
|
15
|
|
|
16
|
Vijay
|
|
17
|
-----
|
|
18
|
Q2=0.42 PionLT data analysis
|
|
19
|
- showed timing plots for low, mid, high epsilon
|
|
20
|
- showed diamond plots for Q2=0.42 and 0.38
|
|
21
|
- t-phi plot for Q2=0.42, but needs to apply a diamond cut to properly
|
|
22
|
represent the experiment acceptance
|
|
23
|
|
|
24
|
- working on total effective charge calculations
|
|
25
|
- background subtracted yields after cuts in progress
|
|
26
|
- preparing SIMC input files for Q2=0.42
|
|
27
|
|
|
28
|
We discuss the need to carefully select what analysis code and data that has to
|
|
29
|
be attached to future publications, per new policies.
|
|
30
|
|
|
31
|
a) All articles published in Physical Review journals will now include a statement
|
|
32
|
detailing where data required to support or replicate the claims can be accessed.
|
|
33
|
This policy took effect January 1, 2025.
|
|
34
|
|
|
35
|
Previously, APS encouraged, but did not required authors to include statements
|
|
36
|
detailing where readers could access data, code, and other source materials.
|
|
37
|
Now, authors must select one of several pre-scripted data availability
|
|
38
|
statements. Authors who do not provide public data must explain why, and if
|
|
39
|
asked, share their data privately with referees and editors.
|
|
40
|
|
|
41
|
b) Nathan (coming from JLUO Board meeting) says that similar language will be
|
|
42
|
added by DOE to the new JLab contractor agreement. JLab will be required to
|
|
43
|
store such code and data, JLab management is in the process of coming up with a
|
|
44
|
policy on this.
|
|
45
|
|
|
46
|
Conclusion: This is something to keep in mind once we start drafting new
|
|
47
|
KaonLT/PionLT articles. i.e. We should consider the best place to post data
|
|
48
|
and code for sharing, and exactly what we choose to share.
|
|
49
|
|
|
50
|
Junaid
|
|
51
|
------
|
|
52
|
HMS matrix elements update
|
|
53
|
- NPS group has finalized new HMS-ME for 5.9, 6.1, 6.7 GeV/c
|
|
54
|
- still working on 5.6 GeV/c ME
|
|
55
|
- they have also determined new 0th order (theta, phi) corrections offsets
|
|
56
|
the claim is that sieve data plots are improved
|
|
57
|
|
|
58
|
- Junaid will put them in touch with Stephen re. being added to agenda of
|
|
59
|
next Quarterly Analysis Meeting
|
|
60
|
|
|
61
|
- status of old low momentum HMS ME
|
|
62
|
- Julie says lots of low momentum sieve data were taken and new ME offsets
|
|
63
|
were refit. Angles done, delta fitting still in progress
|
|
64
|
The concern was that the NPS magnet would have an effect at low HMS
|
|
65
|
momentum, it appears the effect is small but the data can be used to
|
|
66
|
improve the low momentum ME
|
|
67
|
- Tanja contacts Josh, who replies: the 2018 low momentum matrix should be as
|
|
68
|
is at this time. He says that the idea is now to re-fit that matrix with
|
|
69
|
the new methods developed, but none of that has happened
|
|
70
|
- Junaid will folllow up with Josh on this
|
|
71
|
|
|
72
|
- rerunning Heep coin data for GH determine new kinematic offsets
|
|
73
|
- then will test Nathan's new LH2 boiling and ELLT factors
|
|
74
|
- should also include Alicia's proton absorption correction
|
|
75
|
|
|
76
|
Alicia
|
|
77
|
------
|
|
78
|
Extended discussion of referee comments on BSA paper
|
|
79
|
- it seems that some confusion was due to the referee mis-interpreting the
|
|
80
|
purppose of the paper.
|
|
81
|
- need to concentrate a bit less on the comparisons between data and models
|
|
82
|
(since neither work really well), and more on testing the onset of hard-soft
|
|
83
|
factorization (i.e. the data aren't there yet)
|
|
84
|
- Alicia will circulate to this group more info from BG Yu on their models, so
|
|
85
|
we can better evaluate some of the text the referee questioned
|
|
86
|
|
|
87
|
Proton absorption MC - will defer this discussion until next week
|
|
88
|
|
|
89
|
Nathan
|
|
90
|
------
|
|
91
|
PionLT Lumi studies
|
|
92
|
- implemented DMack's ELLT and comparison of different methods
|
|
93
|
Blue: TLT=CPULT*ELLT Red: TLT=EDTM
|
|
94
|
|
|
95
|
- SHMS Carbon 16738-16746: looks very flat for scaler, notrack and track (blue)
|
|
96
|
which is very good news
|
|
97
|
- rates up to 200 kHz @ highest current
|
|
98
|
|
|
99
|
- SHMS LH2 16759-16764: scaler is flat, but notrack and track show boiling
|
|
100
|
|
|
101
|
- Nathan's LH2 boiling number should be used:
|
|
102
|
2.8%/100uA, stat unc: +/-0.17%, syst unc: 0.69%(seems large, will recheck)
|
|
103
|
|
|
104
|
- Nathan will do some more check and then apply to COIN Lumi to check if
|
|
105
|
TLT=CLULT*SHMS-ELLT*HMS-ELLT is consistent w/ TLT=EDTM
|
|
106
|
After that, this study should be done
|
|
107
|
|
|
108
|
Nacer
|
|
109
|
-----
|
|
110
|
KaonLT Q2=0.50 MC/Data normalization
|
|
111
|
- changed SIMC to new model, found no big change
|
|
112
|
- GH will meet with Nacer on Monday to compare SIMC results for same setting
|
|
113
|
|
|
114
|
Next Meeting
|
|
115
|
-------------
|
|
116
|
- Thur Feb 6 @ 15:30 Eastern/14:30 Regina
|
|
117
|
- PionLT will go first
|
|
118
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
120
|
|
|
121
|
|