|
1
|
February 13th, 2026
|
|
2
|
|
|
3
|
Today: KaonLT will be discussed first
|
|
4
|
|
|
5
|
Present
|
|
6
|
---
|
|
7
|
Regina - Garth Huber, Nermin Sadoun, Vijay Kumar
|
|
8
|
CUA - Tanja Horn, Chi Kin Tam
|
|
9
|
York - Stephen Kay
|
|
10
|
Virginia - Richard Trotta
|
|
11
|
Glasglow - Kathleen Ramage
|
|
12
|
---
|
|
13
|
Richard+Chi Kin
|
|
14
|
- Verbal updates
|
|
15
|
- Code and procedure checks were the primary focus
|
|
16
|
- Richard is stripping his code to try and find why him and Kin find different results
|
|
17
|
- As discussed last week, Kin and reproduce Richard's but not visa versa
|
|
18
|
- Kin is trying to use different fitting algorithms in order to find a better parameters that prevent sigL->0 values (specifically in the range t>0.4).
|
|
19
|
- In the Q2=3.0, W=2.32 setting, the minimum bound on t is ~0.4 so the entire set of data is at this sigL->0 regime
|
|
20
|
Vijay
|
|
21
|
- Two iterations of model variation (+/- 10%) for first Q2 setting
|
|
22
|
- There was only a difference of +/- 0.1% for sigL/sigT
|
|
23
|
- The lowest t-bin for sigL saw a difference of -0.4%
|
|
24
|
- Vijay wasn't sure which t-bin uncertainty should be used to quantify, Garth clarified it should be point to point
|
|
25
|
- CT variations (2 iterations)
|
|
26
|
- Huge change +/- 10-20%
|
|
27
|
- This is expected, Richard noted the Jan 30th meeting where Dave commented that this seemed like an odd study to do.
|
|
28
|
- Garth tends to agree
|
|
29
|
- Garth pointed out that the randoms window needs to be rescaled for each variation since the prompt window changes
|
|
30
|
- Goal for next meeting is to finalize this setting's systematics
|
|
31
|
Nermin
|
|
32
|
- Pi- Q2=1.6, W=3.08
|
|
33
|
- Detector efficiency
|
|
34
|
- No RF cuts (removed because of last weeks discussions)
|
|
35
|
- HMS cher: ~95-98%
|
|
36
|
- HMS cal: ~97-98%
|
|
37
|
- SHMS cal:
|
|
38
|
- Very odd values (~50%), but Garth commented it should be ~100% for an efficiency.
|
|
39
|
- It is likely the cut was not a 'less than cut', what she calculated is not an efficiency (rather showing ~50% of events are not pi-)
|
|
40
|
- Garth: Use something like the NGC for a correct study
|
|
41
|
- Although NGC has the issues discussed last week
|
|
42
|
- An offline discussion concluded it's likely not properly calibrated
|
|
43
|
- Question about the different efficiencies (i.e., All, COIN, singles)
|
|
44
|
- It was suggested checking out Ali's thesis as he has a nice section in there
|
|
45
|
- The main goal is looking run by run to find outliers
|
|
46
|
- Goal for next week is to look into the SHMS calorimeter a bit more and the NGC calibration
|
|
47
|
Kathleen
|
|
48
|
- Verbal update
|
|
49
|
- Setting up replays on the farm, but running into issues with permissions
|
|
50
|
- Quick fix: Email Sanghwa (sanghwa@jlab.org) or Hanjie (hanjie@jlab.org) about adding Kathleen to HallC group
|
|
51
|
- Goal look at the same settings as Nermin, but for 2022 (different epsilon)
|