Difference between revisions of "Analysis"

From New IAC Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 1: Line 1:
[http://www.jlab.org/~claseg1/eg1summ.html]run summary<br>
+
[http://www.jlab.org/~claseg1/eg1summ.html run summary]<br>
 
+
[http://www.jlab.org/Hall-B/secure/eg1/EG2000/fersch/QUALITY_CHECKS/file_quality/runinfo.txt polarization info]<br>
  
 
=Particle Identification=
 
=Particle Identification=

Revision as of 22:00, 8 August 2007

run summary
polarization info

Particle Identification

Electron

Cuts

Calorimeter based cuts

The distributions below represent two types of cuts applied to improve the electron particle identification (PID) using a 4 GeV electron beam incident on an NH3 target. The electron calorimeter is segmented into an inner[math]EC_{inner}[/math] and an outer[math]EC_{outer}[/math] region. The total energy absorbed by the calorimeter system is recorded in the variable [math]EC_{tot}[/math]. The momentum ([math]P[/math]) is calculated using the reconstructed track and the known torus magnetic field. The distributions of [math]EC_{tot}[/math] and [math]EC_{inner}[/math] are shown below where both have been divided by the electron momentum and no cuts have been applied.


[math]EC_{tot}\gt 0.2*p[/math]

Without any cuts we have 181018 entries. After using the following cut [math]EC_{tot}\gt 0.2*p[/math] we are getting 127719 entries, which is about 70.55% of 181018.

Etotal P using tot cut.gif
Einner P using tot cut.gif


[math]EC_{inner}\gt 0.08*p[/math]

After the cut on the energy deposited into inner part of electron calorimeter, number of entries decreases by 22%.

Etotal P using inner cut.gif
Einner P using inner cut.gif



Both cuts [math] EC_{tot}\gt 0.2*p [/math] and [math] EC_{inner}\gt 0.08*p [/math]

In case of using the cuts of the total deposited energy and the energy deposited into inner calorimeter number of entries decreases ~36%

Etotal P using both cuts.gif
Einner P using both cuts.gif


summary table

Beam Energy Torus Current Begin Run End Run file used cuts num trig expectd # evts
[math]EC_{tot}\gt 0.2*p[/math] [math]EC_{inner}\gt 0.08*p[/math] [math]EC_{tot}\gt 0.2*p [/math] and [math] EC_{inner}\gt 0.08*p[/math]
1606 1500 25488 25559 dst25504_02.B00 64% 49.5% 78%
1606 1946 25560 25605
1606 1500 25669 25732 dst25669_02.B00 64% 49% 78%
1606 1500 25742 26221 dst25754_02.B00 21% 11% 24%
1606 -1500 26222 26359 dst26224_02.B00 4.6% 3% 6.6%
5764 -2250 26468 26722 dst26489_02.B00 12.2% 14.4% 19.1%
5764 0 26723 26775 dst26779_02.B00 13.5% 15.5% 20.5%
5764 -2250 26776 26851
5735 -2250 26874 27068 dst26904_02.B00 13% 15% 20%
5735 2250 27069 27198 dst27070_02.B00 33.3% 28.8% 42.2%
2288 1500 27205 27351 dst27225_02.B00 20.2% 13% 25.6%
5627 2250 27356 27364 dst27358_02.B00 33.2% 27.8% 41.3%
5627 -2250 27366 27380 dst27368_02.B00 12.6% 14.8% 19.5%
5627 2250 27386 27499 dst27388_02.B00 33.4% 27.8% 41.4%
5627 965 27502 27617
1724 -1500 27644 27798 dst27649_02.B00 4.8% 2.2% 5.9%
2562 -1500 27799 27924 dst27809_02.B00 5.7% 4.6% 8.6%
2792 -1500 27936 27941 dst27937_02.B00 6.7% 5% 9.9%
2562 -1500 27942 27995 dst27942_02.B00 6.1% 4.4% 8.9%
2562 1500 28001 28069 dst28002_02.B00 27.8% 13% 29.6%
4239 2250 28074 28277 dst28075_02.B00 35.3% 23.9% 40.5%
4239 -2250 28280 28479 dst28281_02.B00 9.1% 9.4% 13.6%
4239 2250 28482 28494
4239 -2250 28500 28505
4239 2250 28506 28510 dst28509_02.B00 29.5% 22% 36%
1724 1500 28512 28526
1724 -1500 28527 28532
3210 -2250 28549 28570

Cut on the number of photoelectrons

In this case is used a cut on the number of photoelectrons, which is [math]nphe\gt 2.5[/math]. The plots below show the effect of the number of photoelectrons cuts on the Cerenkov distribution. We see that after using cut the number of entries decreases ~40.7%

Nphe before cut.gif
Nphe after cut.gif


Pion

Quality Checks

Rates

Asymmetries