| 
      1
     | 
    
                       Feb 6/25 PionLT/KaonLT Analysis Meeting Notes
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      2
     | 
    
                       ---------------------------------------------
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      3
     | 
    
                                      (Notes by GH)
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      4
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      5
     | 
    
                           Today: PionLT will be discussed first
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      6
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      7
     | 
    
      Present
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      8
     | 
    
      -------
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      9
     | 
    
      Regina - Garth Huber, Alicia Postuma, Muhammad Junaid, Ali Usman, Nacer Hamdi,
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      10
     | 
    
         Vijay Kumar, Nathan Heinrich
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      11
     | 
    
      CSULA - Konrad Aniol
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      12
     | 
    
      FIU - Pete Markowitz
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      13
     | 
    
      Virginia - Richard Trotta
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      14
     | 
    
      CUA - Tanja Horn
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      15
     | 
    
      JLab - Dave Gaskell
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      16
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      17
     | 
    
      Short discussion on status of High Q^2 p(e,e'K+)Sigma0 analysis
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      18
     | 
    
      - Richard and Tanja had a discussion
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      19
     | 
    
      - There are 2 main parts to this analysis
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      20
     | 
    
        a) Sigma0 L/T-separated cross sections (where statistics allow)
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      21
     | 
    
        b) g_pKLambda and g_pKSigma coupling constant comparison
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      22
     | 
    
      - Richard would appreciate Gabi and Ioana's help on the cross section analaysis
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      23
     | 
    
      - GH will put Gabi and Ioana in contact with Richard
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      24
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      25
     | 
    
      Junaid
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      26
     | 
    
      ------
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      27
     | 
    
      PionLT data analysis - HMS magnetic optics
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      28
     | 
    
      - currently using phi offsets=0 for both spectrometers
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      29
     | 
    
        - looked at some old files (Stephen's online analysis) and found non-zero
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      30
     | 
    
          offsets, SHMS: -8E-4 rad, HMS: 4.9E-3 rad
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      31
     | 
    
        - Richard: we discussed this before
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      32
     | 
    
          See Nov 21/24 meeting notes at:
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      33
     | 
    
            https://redmine.jlab.org/attachments/2673
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      34
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      35
     | 
    
        - agreement that the offsets are set during the ME fitting and should not
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      36
     | 
    
          change
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      37
     | 
    
        - Dave: low momentum HMS ME should come from 6 GeV era
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      38
     | 
    
        - Ali: thought Holly made a newer set of low momentum HMS ME in the 2017
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      39
     | 
    
          commissioning period
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      40
     | 
    
        - Tanja: take a look at
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      41
     | 
    
          https://hallcweb.jlab.org/wiki/index.php?title=12_GeV_HMS_Optics_Data
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      42
     | 
    
          this page lists ME only for >5 GeV/c from the commissioning period,
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      43
     | 
    
          nothing listed for low momentum region which must come from 6 GeV
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      44
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      45
     | 
    
      - for higher energy ME, using NPS offsets, for lower energy using zero offset
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      46
     | 
    
        - Dave: *NB* will check, has seen various offset values floating around
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      47
     | 
    
      - implemented NPS ME for 5.8, 6.1, 6.7 GeV/c, work still in progress for 5.6
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      48
     | 
    
        GeV/c
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      49
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      50
     | 
    
      Next steps:
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      51
     | 
    
      - setting up for Pass 2 Physics replay
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      52
     | 
    
        - implemented Nathan's boiling correction to Qeff script
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      53
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      54
     | 
    
      Nathan
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      55
     | 
    
      ------
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      56
     | 
    
      - no report, please send comments on WNPPC slides by email
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      57
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      58
     | 
    
      Richard
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      59
     | 
    
      -------
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      60
     | 
    
      KaonLT Q2=4.4, W=2.74 analysis
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      61
     | 
    
      - adjusted and simplified parameterization
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      62
     | 
    
        sigT=p5*exp(-|p6 t|)*QdepT
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      63
     | 
    
          where QdepT=exp*(-Q^4)/Q^2
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      64
     | 
    
        sigTT=(p13*QdepTT)*ft*sin^2(theta)
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      65
     | 
    
          where QdepTT=Q^2*exp(-Q^2)
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      66
     | 
    
        both use Wfac=1/(W^2-m^2)^2
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      67
     | 
    
      - putting absolute values in the exponentials helped keep things well behaved
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      68
     | 
    
      - obtain nice agreement in focal plane and physics distribution shapes between
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      69
     | 
    
        data and MC
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      70
     | 
    
      - the only issue is that the ratios are 0.2-0.4
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      71
     | 
    
        - will have to adjust Wfac, we know from Q2=3.0 analysis that this made a big
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      72
     | 
    
          difference in the Data/MC ratios
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      73
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      74
     | 
    
      Alicia
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      75
     | 
    
      ------
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      76
     | 
    
      Geant4 proton absorption correction
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      77
     | 
    
      - gave an overview of the PA classes defined
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      78
     | 
    
      - added an option to turn/off NGC in detectors.dat
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      79
     | 
    
        - SHMS exit window is moved forward when NGC not in place
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      80
     | 
    
        - only the most dense aerogel is implemented so far
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      81
     | 
    
        - target and SHMS entrance windows are included
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      82
     | 
    
      - had to add Cherenkov NPE to custom stepping action class
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      83
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      84
     | 
    
      - event generation:
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      85
     | 
    
        - printed out focal plane variables for a data run into a txt file and reads
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      86
     | 
    
          into Geant4, so actual focal plane distribution is simulated
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      87
     | 
    
          - events are generated at center of LH2 target, where for the target
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      88
     | 
    
            variables
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      89
     | 
    
             Xtar=xfp + xpfp*Ztar
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      90
     | 
    
             Ytar=yfp + ypfp*Ztar
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      91
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      92
     | 
    
      - S1X, S1Y, S2X, S2Y energy spectra are generated
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      93
     | 
    
        - energy deposit is >1 MeV, shape looks reasonable
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      94
     | 
    
        - applies an energy threshold per plane based on this distribution, to mimic
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      95
     | 
    
          the effect of the discriminator in the trigger
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      96
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      97
     | 
    
      - very preliminary result: 6.4% proton absorption for 5 GeV/c
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      98
     | 
    
        - tried 1-10 GeV/c, get similar absorption for all proton momenta
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      99
     | 
    
        - Ali points out this is consistent with statement in John Matter's thesis
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      100
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      101
     | 
    
      - starting to try different particle types
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      102
     | 
    
        - Pete: you will have to turn off pi/K decay in Geant4, since SIMC already
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      103
     | 
    
          takes the decay into account and we don't want to double correct for this
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      104
     | 
    
          - i.e. we want missing triggers due to absorption, not decay
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      105
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      106
     | 
    
      - list is made of where different particles stop
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      107
     | 
    
        - can do a cross check between absorption fraction of total in spreadsheet
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      108
     | 
    
        - aerogel tray is about 15% of total absorption
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      109
     | 
    
          - *NB* indicates a need to do different calculations for different aerogel
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      110
     | 
    
            densities
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      111
     | 
    
        - NGC is about 20% of total, which imples a proton absorption correction for
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      112
     | 
    
          KaonLT closer to 5%
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      113
     | 
    
        
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      114
     | 
    
      - Geant4 outputs the nuclear interaction length lambdaL per material
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      115
     | 
    
        - Geant4 numbers a bit lower than PDG except for LH2
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      116
     | 
    
        - presumably this difference is due to different temperature/pressure than
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      117
     | 
    
          Hall C cryotarget
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      118
     | 
    
          - Garth: *NB* suggests to cross check LH2 density with what is in SIMC
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      119
     | 
    
            input file
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      120
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      121
     | 
    
      - some detector configuration checks that were done:
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      122
     | 
    
        - detector positions pulled from SHMS focal plane blueprint
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      123
     | 
    
        - had to convert NGC gas from CO2 to 70% Ar/30% Ne in spreadsheet
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      124
     | 
    
        - *NB* need to check what type of material is used for NGC exit window
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      125
     | 
    
        - HGC gas changed from CO2 to C4F10 in spreadsheet
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      126
     | 
    
          - *NB* Vijay will get Alicia the exact gas pressure used during KaonLT
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      127
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      128
     | 
    
      - arranged with Stephen to present at Quarterly Analysis Meeting
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      129
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      130
     | 
    
      - everything looks very nice!  Thanks Alicia for working on this
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      131
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      132
     | 
    
      Nacer
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      133
     | 
    
      -----
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      134
     | 
    
      KaonLT 3.8 GeV data analysis
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      135
     | 
    
      - fixed problem with SIMC normalization, MC much closer to data now, applied an
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      136
     | 
    
        ad-hoc normalization factor to more easily compare distribution shapes
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      137
     | 
    
        - Lambda data 2x higher than model
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      138
     | 
    
        - Sigma data 9x higher than model
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      139
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      140
     | 
    
      - focal plane and physics distribution comparison looks good
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      141
     | 
    
        - now applying a MM cut to select Lambda region
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      142
     | 
    
        - also did a Sigma window and compared Data to MC
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      143
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      144
     | 
    
      - Ali: is the MC smearing factor applied?
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      145
     | 
    
        - confirmed mc_shms_hut.f resmult=3.5 so the factor is IN
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      146
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      147
     | 
    
      Next steps:
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      148
     | 
    
      - more checks to confirm cuts are OK on some representative files before
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      149
     | 
    
        submitting full data job
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      150
     | 
    
        - will check RF cut and RF cut efficiencies
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      151
     | 
    
        - should add Nathan's LH2 target boiling factor to Qeff
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      152
     | 
    
        - should also add Nathan's ELLT calculation and compare to EDTM to confirm
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      153
     | 
    
          reliability of EDTM before proceeding
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      154
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      155
     | 
    
        - Nathan: here is the raw python code, let me know if it is not clear:
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      156
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      157
     | 
    
      #calculate the ELLT via individual Hodoplane rates per Dave Mack technique
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      158
     | 
    
          #For details see: https://hallcweb.jlab.org/doc-private/ShowDocument?docid=1063
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      159
     | 
    
          HODOGATEWIDTH = 50/(10**9) #ns - gate width is PionLT
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      160
     | 
    
          SHMS_HodoRate = [0]*NRATEHODO
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      161
     | 
    
          SHMSTrueRate = [0]*NRATEHODO
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      162
     | 
    
          SHMSDT = [0]*NRATEHODO
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      163
     | 
    
          SHMSLT = [0]*NRATEHODO
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      164
     | 
    
          #HMS_HodoRate = [0]*NRATEHODO
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      165
     | 
    
          for iRATE in range(0, NRATEHODO): #iRATE is the number is the hodoscope plane
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      166
     | 
    
              SHMS_HodoRate[iRATE] =  SHMS_Hodo_rate_sum[iRATE]/time_sum[bcm_ix]
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      167
     | 
    
              #HMS_HodoRate[iRATE] =  HMS_Hodo_rate_sum[iRATE]/time_sum[bcm_ix]
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      168
     | 
    
              
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      169
     | 
    
              SHMSTrueRate[iRATE] = SHMS_HodoRate[iRATE]/(1 - HODOGATEWIDTH*SHMS_HodoRate[iRATE]) 
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      170
     | 
    
              #HMSTrueRate[iRATE] = HMS_HodoRate[iRATE]*(1 - HODOGATEWIDTH*HMS_HodoRate[iRATE])
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      171
     | 
    
              
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      172
     | 
    
              SHMSDT[iRATE] = SHMSTrueRate[iRATE]*HODOGATEWIDTH
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      173
     | 
    
              #HMSDT[iRATE] = HMSTrueRate[iRATE]*HODOGATEWIDTH
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      174
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      175
     | 
    
              SHMSLT[iRATE] = 1 - SHMSDT[iRATE]
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      176
     | 
    
              #HMSLT[iRATE] = 1 - HMSDT
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      177
     | 
    
          
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      178
     | 
    
          SHMS3of4ELT = SHMSLT[0]*SHMSLT[1]*SHMSLT[2]*SHMSLT[3] + SHMSDT[0]*SHMSLT[1]*SHMSLT[2]*SHMSLT[3] + SHMSLT[0]*SHMSDT[1]*SHMSLT[2]*SHMSLT[3] + SHMSLT[0]*SHMSLT[1]*SHMSDT[2]*SHMSLT[3] + SHMSLT[0]*SHMSLT[1]*SHMSLT[2]*SHMSDT[3]
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      179
     | 
    
          #HMS3of4ELT = HMSLT[0]*HMSLT[1]*HMSLT[2]*HMSLT[3] + HMSDT[0]*HMSLT[1]*HMSLT[2]*HMSLT[3] + HMSLT[0]*HMSDT[1]*HMSLT[2]*HMSLT[3] + HMSLT[0]*HMSLT[1]*HMSDT[2]*HMSLT[3] + HMSLT[0]*HMSLT[1]*HMSLT[2]*HMSDT[3]
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      180
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      181
     | 
    
       P_S1X_scaler = s_tree["P.S1X.scaler"].array()
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      182
     | 
    
              P_S1Y_scaler = s_tree["P.S1Y.scaler"].array()
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      183
     | 
    
              P_S2X_scaler = s_tree["P.S2X.scaler"].array()
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      184
     | 
    
              P_S2Y_scaler = s_tree["P.S2Y.scaler"].array()
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      185
     | 
    
              
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      186
     | 
    
              #H_S1X_scaler = s_tree["H.S1X.scaler"].array()
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      187
     | 
    
              #H_S1Y_scaler = s_tree["H.S1Y.scaler"].array()
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      188
     | 
    
              #H_S2X_scaler = s_tree["H.S2X.scaler"].array()
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      189
     | 
    
              #H_S2Y_scaler = s_tree["H.S2Y.scaler"].array()
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      190
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      191
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      192
     | 
    
      Next Meeting
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      193
     | 
    
      -------------
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      194
     | 
    
      - Thur Feb 13 @ 15:30 Eastern/14:30 Regina
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      195
     | 
    
        - KaonLT will go first
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      196
     | 
    
        - Nathan and Alicia will be at WNPPC in Banff then, please remember to send
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      197
     | 
    
          your comments on their slides by email
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      198
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      199
     | 
    
      
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      200
     | 
    
        
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      201
     | 
    
       
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      202
     | 
    
        
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      203
     | 
    
        
 
     | 
  
  
    | 
      204
     | 
    
       
 
     |