Jul 25/24 PionLT/KaonLT Analysis Meeting Notes ---------------------------------------------- (Notes by Dave) Today: KaonLT will be discussed first Attendees: DG, Richard, Ali, Nacer, Junaid, Tanja, Julie, Zachary (apologies if a I missed someone, forgot to note this at the beginning) Richard ------- Got analysis working on alma9 following Junaid's notes on Redmine. Added (or maybe was already there?) ".login" script to set things up more easily. Working on iteration - explored changing functional forms for sigmaT and sigmaTT. There was an issue with the 0th iteration - recon_hcana was used to re-calculate physics quantities, but then this wasn't piped back into into the model calculation. (DG note: I'm surprised this made a difference). Discussed "interesting" shape of sigmaT. Will explore simpler, ad-hoc functional form for sigmaT model (maybe just depnendant on -t?). The asymmetry about phi=180 degrees is also strange - there's no physics that would cause this unless: 1. There is residual beam polarization in data sample 2. The average Q2/t/W is different as a function of phi - and those dependencies are not described correclty by the model. Richard will provide averages of Q2/t/W vs. phi for next meeting. Ali --- Thesis writing! Generated asymmetry plots for all settings. Will show at next meeting when everyone is back. 2 of 4 systematic studies done. Will also add study of impact of HGC cut dependence. Nacer ----- Working on Heep analysis. Showed cuts and efficiencies. Data/simc ratios are consistent with 1.0 but with large uncertainties (10%). It's unclear where the large uncertainties are coming from - the statistical uncertainties for the Heep data sample should be on the order of 1% or smaller. Nacer will make a table of corrections and their uncertainties for next meeting. Also showed Data/SIMC for 4 elastic form factor fits (Bosted, AMT, Brash, Arrington). All were in pretty reasonable agreement except for the Arrington fit. Nacer sent DG the physics_proton.f file he's using - I think I found an incorrect sign for one of the coefficients. Junaid ------ Also looking at Heep for 2021/2022 data. As with Nacer's analysis, the error bars on the data/SIMC ratios are pretty big (30% in some cases). We'll discuss the uncertainties more next week. Also noticed some really broad distributions in Em. Julie suggests it might not be the right variable being plotted since the W distribution looks good. Dave suggested looking at correlations of Em with other variables. Next Meeting ------------ Note the Special Time: Wed July 31 @ 15:00 Eastern/13:00 Regina - PionLT will go first