Jan 5/22 PionLT/KaonLT Analysis Meeting Notes Participants: - Richard Trotta, CUA - Pete Markowitz, FIU - Dave Gaskell, JLab - Jacob Murphy, Ohio - Nathan Heinrich, Garth Huber, Muhammad Junaid, Stephen Kay, Vijay Kumar, Love Preet, Ali Usman, Regina Meeting slides are posted at: https://redmine.jlab.org/projects/kltexp/wiki/Kaon_LT_Meetings Richard ------- 1) Analysis Task List - shows updated high Q2 timeline posted at https://redmine.jlab.org/projects/kltexp/wiki/Analysis_Tasks - generally looks good - need to break-down more division of tasks with Ali - also suggest to coordinate low Q2 task list schedule with Vijay - update the RedMine list with both of these 2) EDTM studies - plans to do more studies this weekend Vijay ----- 1) Low Q2 Heep-Singles Study - unlike the Heep-Coin study, which has reasonable (early) agreement between data and SIMC, the Heep-Singles yields disagree substantially between data and SIMC - Suggestions: - Remove H_hodo_goodscinhit cut - Increase p_arm generation limits by 2-3x - add ytar, xtar plots, so we can see them too - set beer_can target=1 instead of tuna_can target=2 in SIMC. In the longer term, we will need to modify SIMC code for the actual target geometry used in KaonLT/PionLT - it looks like there is a hole in the SHMS focal plane. Since an HGC cut is used, this is likely caused by the inefficient region in the center of the detector. For yield studies, it is better to just remove the HGC cut since Heep-electrons should be fairly clean. However, for validation of the physics analysis (which will require the cut), we should do a second Heep-singles analysis with the cut included in both data and SIMC, so we can compare their effects. - Dave notices that the target thickness is wrong in the SIMC input file, 4cm instead of 10cm. Undoubtedly this will make a big difference. Nathan ------ 1) Analyzing the new Mode-10 variables in PionLT data - Nathan summarizes the new Mode-10 variables that Mark Jones has implemented in hcana (see slides). - Mark's intention is to re-create in software from the waveform data, the equivalent variables that are output by the FADC, so their differences can be studied and understood. There are a lot of new variables to study and understand. Mark has done a cursory check, and wants Nathan to look at them in more detail, and look for problems. - Still having some difficulties getting the new hcana to compile. 2) SIDIS Lumi Study - yield study looks encouraging. - HMS singles: Scaler rate dep <2.5%. Untracked rate dep < 2.0%. Tracked: linear rate dep that needs to be understood. - SHMS singles: Scaler rate dep <5.0%. Untracked <8.0%. Tracked: same linear rate dependence as HMS. - COIN: since randoms dominate, expect a linear rate dep, which is observed for scaler analysis. But untracked and tracked analyses see a linear drop with rate (instead of increase) which needs to be understood. - Nathan has implemented an untracked COIN variable for use in the untracked COIN analysis. - need to loosen PID cuts to avoid rate dependence, as the cuts might be a bit tight. Jacob ----- 1) EDTM Analysis Summary - shows two T.coin.pEDTM_tdcTimeRaw timing plots that are particularly interesting. - overlapping distns of EDMTs coming at different times when using PS2,4 - when using PS1,3 they are separated, so it's easier to tell what's going on ** For future Lumi studies, we should probably use PS1,3 so they are separated, as this allows an independent check of the PS factor operation - still has TLT>100% - equation on slide 2 doesn't take into account the physics triggers which adjust the number of EDTM events prescaled away. - needs to think more on modifying the equation for added physics triggers and see if this improves the TLT values Next Meeting: Wed Jan 12 @ 11:00 Regina/NOON JLab time