Difference between revisions of "DeltaDoverD Progress"

From New IAC Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 1,503: Line 1,503:
  
 
===Rate differences===
 
===Rate differences===
 +
 +
<math>Ratio_1 = \frac{1}{2} = 24</math>
 +
 +
<math>Ratio_2 = \frac{5}{4} = 19</math>
 +
 +
 +
or
 +
 +
<math>Ratio_3 = \frac{1}{5} = 1.2</math>
 +
 +
<math>Ratio_4 = \frac{4}{2} = 1.03</math>
 +
 +
  
 
[[Delta_D_over_D]]
 
[[Delta_D_over_D]]

Revision as of 19:29, 10 February 2010

9/5/08

SIDIS Analysis

a.) Cross-Section comparison

i.) Calculate absolute cross section for [math]\cos(\theta_{pi})[/math] = 0.5, 1 < Q^2 < 4 GeV^2 , W = 1.45 +/- 0.2 GeV

[math]{\sigma} = \frac{1}{ L_{int}}dN = \frac{35}{3.3 \times 10^{34}} \times cm^2 = 10.61 \times10^{-34} \times 10^{24} \times [barn] = 1.061 \times 10^{-3} [\mu barn][/math]

Luminosity Calculation

Phi angle in CM Frame vs Relative Rate cos theta 0-4 0-6 W 1-45.jpg


ii.) Plot [math]\phi_{diff}^{CM}[/math]-vs-[math]cos{\theta}_{\pi}^{LAB}[/math] when [math]cos{\theta}_{e}^{CM}[/math] = -0.3 also plot [math]\phi_{diff}^{CM}[/math]-vs- [math]cos{\theta}_{e}^{LAB}[/math]

As one can see from histograms of the pion_theta_angle_vs_phi_angle_in_CM_Frame and the electron_theta_angle_vs_phi_angle_in_CM_Frame, the pion and electron acceptance in the region of [math]\phi_{diff}^{CM}=180[/math] is nearly zero(significantly low).

electron sector pion_theta_angle_vs_phi_angle_in_CM_Frame_after_cuts(EC_inner>0.06, EC_tot/p>0.2, nphe>2.5, [math]0.9\lt M_x\lt 1.1[/math], [math]1.1\lt W\lt 1.5[/math] ) electron_theta_angle_vs_phi_angle_in_CM_Frame_after_cuts(EC_inner>0.06, EC_tot/p>0.2, nphe>2.5, [math]0.9\lt M_x\lt 1.1[/math], [math]1.1\lt W\lt 1.5[/math] )
1 Pion theta angle vs phi angle in cm frame after cuts e sector 1.gif Electron theta angle vs phi angle in cm frame after cuts e sector 1.gif
2 Pion theta angle vs phi angle in cm frame after cuts e sector 2.gif Electron theta angle vs phi angle in cm frame after cuts e sector 2.gif
3 Pion theta angle vs phi angle in cm frame after cuts e sector 3.gif Electron theta angle vs phi angle in cm frame after cuts e sector 3.gif
4 Pion theta angle vs phi angle in cm frame after cuts e sector 4.gif Electron theta angle vs phi angle in cm frame after cuts e sector 4.gif
5 Pion theta angle vs phi angle in cm frame after cuts e sector 5.gif Electron theta angle vs phi angle in cm frame after cuts e sector 5.gif
6 Pion theta angle vs phi angle in cm frame after cuts e sector 6.gif Electron theta angle vs phi angle in cm frame after cuts e sector 6.gif


Pion theta vs phi angle cm Theta pion lab 0 32 3D.gifPhi angle cm Theta pion lab 0 32 3D.gif

[math]Q^2[/math]_vs_[math]\phi_{diff}^{CM}[/math] plot shows that the [math]Q^2[/math] cut should not make much difference on [math]\phi_{diff}^{CM}[/math] plot. The cut around [math]1 GeV^2 \lt Q^2\lt 2 GeV^2[/math] should reduce the number of pions around 0 and 360 of phi angle.

Q sqrd vs phi angle in cm frame after cuts all Q.gif

9/19/08

SIDIS Analysis

a.) Cross-Section comparison

i.) Calculate absolute cross section for [math]\cos(\theta_{pi})[/math] = 0.5, 1 < Q^2 < 4 GeV^2 , W = 1.45 +/- 0.2 GeV 

[math]\frac{d \sigma}{d \Omega^*_{\pi}} = \frac{1.061 \times 10^{-3} [\mu barn]}{0.88} = 0.0012 \ne 2.4[/math]?


Documentation


The five-fold differential cross section for single pion production is equal to the following:

[math]\frac{\partial^5 \sigma}{\partial E_f \partial \Omega_e \partial {\Omega_{\pi}}^*} = \frac{1}{2 \pi} \Sigma \frac{1}{L_{int} A_{cc} \epsilon_{CC} \Delta W \Delta Q^2 \Delta cos {\theta_{\pi}}^* {\phi_{\pi}}^*} \frac{d(W, Q^2)}{d(E_f, cos \theta_e)}[/math]

The Jacobian term can be given as:

[math]\frac{d(W, Q^2)}{d(E_f, cos \theta_e)} = \frac{2 M_p E_i E_f}{W}[/math]


[math]\frac{\partial^5 \sigma}{\partial E_f \partial \Omega_e \partial {\Omega_{\pi}}^*} = \Gamma_{v}\times \frac{d^2 \sigma}{d {\Omega_{\pi}}^*}[/math]


where [math]\Gamma_{v}[/math] is the virtual photon flux and can be written as

[math]\Gamma_{v} = \frac{\alpha}{2 \pi^2 Q^2} \frac{(W^2 - {M_p}^2)E_f}{2M_p E_e} \frac{1}{1-\epsilon}[/math]
[math]\epsilon = (1 + 2(1+\frac{{\nu}^2}{Q^2})tan^2 \frac{\theta_e}{2})^{-1}[/math]

The reason of having low cross section might be binning

In paper they use the following number of bins:



Variable Num. Bin Range Bin Size
W 27 1.15 - 1.7 GeV 20 MeV
[math]Q^2[/math] 7 1.1 - 5.0 [math]GeV^2[/math] variable
[math]cos {\theta_{\pi}}^*[/math] 10 -1.0 - 1.0 0.2
[math]{\phi_{\pi}}^*[/math] 24 -180. - 180 15


Number of bins in my case were 360.


Number of bins equal is ~24

Phi angle in cm frame vs cross section actual one cuts on MissingMass W cos theta 0-5 nocut onQsqr.jpg

When i applied [math]1.6\lt Q^2\lt 1.84[/math] cut, the number of entries were reduced to 152.

In paper they use liquid-hydrogen unpolarized target(we have NH3 and ND3 polarized). The polarized electron beam current is 8 nA(in our case it is about 6 nA). and luminosity is different too. It also depends on statistics.

ii.) What is smallest angular coverage of EC (8 degrees?) Determine phi region where there is no acceptance ( where should we stop plotting data)?

iii.) Asymmetry Calculation

a.) Beam Asymmetry Plot

In order to plot Beam Asymmetry we need to plot for the first time the histogram of the invariant_mass_vs_cross_section. Then determine the structure function fitting the cross section and calculating the beam asymmetry function which is given as :

[math]A_{TL^'} = \sqrt{2\epsilon (1 - \epsilon)} \sigma_{LT^'} \times sin{\phi_{\pi}}^*[/math]

for given cos(theta) of the pion in cm, Q^2 and W invariant mass.

Choose kinematics ( a single theta and phi point )to max our stats and comparison to paper Histogram the following

  1. Number of e-pi coincidence events, number of FC counts
  2. Number of e-pi coincidence events/FC counts
  3. Number of e-pi coincidence events/FC count/Pt

for groups of runs with h_e,P_t = ++, +-, -+, --

table with 4 columns of h_e, P_t and 3 rows of the above histograms

9/26/08

SIDIS Analysis

1.) make semi-inclusive spectrum:

a.) h>0 Pt>0 b.) h > 0 pt<0 c.)h<0 pt>0 d.)h<0 pt<0

2.) ad up opposite target polarization histograms

3.) subtract h> 0 and h<0


Electron beam helicity asymmetry vs phi angle cm from paper.gif


helflag = 1 =>

helflag = 2 =>

helflag = 3 =>

helflag = 4 =>


Helcode 1 phi angle cm frame opposite target polarizations are added W 1-4 costhetapionCM 0-1.gifHelcode 2 phi angle cm frame opposite target polarizations are added W 1-4 costhetapionCM 0-1.gif Helcode 3 phi angle cm frame opposite target polarizations are added W 1-4 costhetapionCM 0-1.gifHelcode 4 phi angle cm frame opposite target polarizations are added W 1-4 costhetapionCM 0-1.gif


1 4substructed helcodes phi angle cm frame.gif3 2substructed helcodes phi angle cm frame.gif
1 4sum helcodes phi angle cm frame.gif3 2sum helcodes phi angle cm frame.gif


1 4substructed helcodes phi angle cm frame xmgrace.jpg3 2substructed helcodes phi angle cm frame xmgrace.jpg

Phi_angle_CM vs Asymmetry

Compared data(there is no table for asymmetry values like cross section):

1 4substructed helcodes phi angle cm frame xmgrace and results from.jpg3 2substructed helcodes phi angle cm frame xmgrace and results from.jpg

11/21/08

0.) insert run summarry table, Pb, Pt, PB*Pt, Btorus

1.) make semi-inclusive spectrum:

a.) h>0 Pt>0

b.) h > 0 pt<0

c.)h<0 pt>0

d.)h<0 pt<0

2.) helicity difference plots for Pt>0 and Pt<0

3.) Asym plots for Pt>0 and Pt< 0

4.) unpolarized target asymmetry 

Rebin asymmetry hisograms and combine the two into a total asymmetry histogram

Run Summary Table

The table below should have run ranges with 
[math]P_b*P_t \pm \Delta (P_b *P_t)[/math] according 
to the elastic asymmetry measurements stored at
http://www.jlab.org/Hall-B/secure/eg1/EG2000/eg1b_analysis_progress.htm.



http://www.jlab.org/Hall-B/secure/eg1/EG2000/josh/pbpt/

5.73 in
pos = 0.45743 +/- 0.04269
neg = -0.38816 +/- 0.04556


5.73 out
pos = 0.46604 +/- 0.03496
neg = -0.50684 +/- 0.03578

Start Run Number Beam Polarization(Pb) Target Polarization(Pt) from dstdump file Pb*Pt Beam Torus Beam Energy (MeV)
26998 0 -0.69 0.46604 -2250 5736
26996 -0.71 -0.69 0.46604 -2250 5736
26995 -0.71 -0.69 0.46604 -2250 5736
26994 -0.71 -0.73 0.46604 -2250 5736
26993 -0.71 -0.72 0.46604 -2250 5736
26992 -0.71 -0.73 0.46604 -2250 5736
26991 -0.71 -0.75 0.46604 -2250 5736
26990 -0.71 -0.76 0.46604 -2250 5736
26989 0.71 -0.67 -0.38816 2250 5736
26988 0.71 -0.68 -0.38816 2250 5736
26987 0.71 -0.67 -0.38816 2250 5736
26986 0.71 -0.68 -0.38816 2250 5736
26985 0.71 -0.68 -0.38816 2250 5736
26984 0.71 -0.68 -0.38816 2250 5736
26983 0.71 -0.68 -0.38816 2250 5736
26981 0.71 -0.68 -0.38816 2250 5736
26980 0.71 -0.7 -0.38816 2250 5736
26979 0.71 -0.71 -0.38816 2250 5736
26966 0.71 0.74 0.45743 2250 5736
26965 0.71 0.74 0.45743 2250 5736
26964 0.71 0.74 0.45743 2250 5736
26963 0.71 0.74 0.45743 2250 5736
26962 0.71 0.74 0.45743 2250 5736
26961 0.71 0.75 0.45743 2250 5736
26960 0.71 0.76 0.45743 2250 5736
26959 0.71 0.69 0.45743 2250 5736
26958 0.71 0.69 0.45743 2250 5736
26957 0.71 0.69 0.45743 2250 5736
26956 0.71 0.69 0.45743 2250 5736
26955 0.71 0.69 0.45743 2250 5736
26954 0.71 0.69 0.45743 2250 5736
26953 0.71 0.69 0.45743 2250 5736
26952 0.71 0.7 0.45743 2250 5736
26951 0.71 0.7 0.45743 2250 5736
26948 0.71 0.7 0.45743 2250 5736
26947 0.71 0.7 0.45743 2250 5736
26946 0.71 0.7 0.45743 2250 5736
26945 0.71 0.7 0.45743 2250 5736
26943 0.7 0.7 0.45743 2250 5736
26942 0.7 0.7 0.45743 2250 5736
26941 0.7 0.7 0.45743 2250 5736
26940 0.7 0.7 0.45743 2250 5736
26939 0.7 0.7 0.45743 2250 5736
26938 0.7 0.7 0.45743 2250 5736
26937 0.7 0.7 0.45743 2250 5736
26934 0.7 0.7 0.45743 2250 5736
26933 0.7 0.71 0.45743 2250 5736
26932 0.7 0.71 0.45743 2250 5736
26931 0.7 0.71 0.45743 2250 5736
26930 0.7 0.71 0.45743 2250 5736
26929 0.7 0.71 0.45743 2250 5736
26928 0.7 0.72 0.45743 2250 5736
26927 0.7 0.72 0.45743 2250 5736
26926 0.7 0.73 0.45743 2250 5736
26925 0.7 0.73 0.45743 2250 5736
27074 0.71 -0.81 -0.38816 2250 5736
27075 0.71 -0.77 -0.38816 2250 5736
27076 0.71 -0.74 -0.38816 2250 5736
27077 0.71 -0.74 -0.38816 2250 5736
27078 071 -0.75 -0.38816 2250 5736
27079 0.71 -0.72 -0.38816 2250 5736
27100 0.71 0.76 0.45743 2250 5736
27101 0.71 0.76 0.45743 2250 5736
27102 0.71 0.73 0.45743 2250 5736
27105 0.61 0.73 0.45743 2250 5736
27106 0.61 0.73 0.45743 2250 5736
27107 0.61 -0.71 -0.38816 2250 5736
27108 0.61 -0.7 -0.38816 2250 5736
27109 0.61 -0.7 -0.38816 2250 5736
27111 0.61 -0.71 -0.38816 2250 5736
27112 0.61 -0.69 -0.38816 2250 5736
27114 0.61 0 2250 5736
27116 -0.58 0.2 -0.38816 2250 5736
27124 -0.7 0.24 -0.38816 2250 5736
27125 -0.7 0.25 -0.38816 2250 5736
27126 -0.7 0.26 -0.38816 2250 5736
27127 -0.7 0.26 -0.38816 2250 5736
27128 -0.7 0.26 -0.38816 2250 5736
27129 -0.7 0.26 -0.38816 2250 5736
27131 -0.7 0.26 -0.38816 2250 5736
27132 -0.7 0.26 -0.38816 2250 5736
27133 -0.7 0.26 -0.38816 2250 5736
27134 -0.7 0.26 -0.38816 2250 5736
27135 -0.7 0.26 -0.38816 2250 5736
27136 -0.7 0.26 -0.38816 2250 5736
27137 -0.7 0.25 -0.38816 2250 5736
27138 -0.7 0.25 -0.38816 2250 5736
27139 -0.7 0.25 -0.38816 2250 5736
27141 -0.7 0.25 -0.38816 2250 5736
27142 -0.7 0.25 -0.38816 2250 5736
27143 -0.7 0.25 -0.38816 2250 5736
27145 -0.7 0.24 -0.38816 2250 5736
27146 -0.7 0.24 -0.38816 2250 5736
27148 -0.7 0.24 -0.38816 2250 5736
27149 -0.7 -0.09 0.45743 2250 5736
27150 -0.7 -0.12 0.45743 2250 5736
27152 -0.64 -0.18 0.45743 2250 5736
27153 -0.64 -0.19 0.45743 2250 5736
27154 -0.64 -0.19 0.45743 2250 5736
27155 -0.64 -0.19 0.45743 2250 5736
27156 -0.64 -0.19 0.45743 2250 5736
27157 -0.64 -0.19 0.45743 2250 5736
27160 -0.64 -0.18 0.45743 2250 5736
27161 -0.64 -0.18 0.45743 2250 5736
27162 -0.64 -0.19 0.45743 2250 5736
27163 -0.64 -0.19 0.45743 2250 5736
27165 -0.64 -0.19 0.45743 2250 5736
27166 -0.64 0.18 -0.38816 2250 5736
27167 -0.64 0.22 -0.38816 2250 5736
27168 -0.64 0.23 -0.38816 2250 5736
27169 -0.64 0.23 -0.38816 2250 5736
27170 -0.64 0.23 -0.38816 2250 5736
27171 -0.64 0.23 -0.38816 2250 5736
27172 -0.64 -0.35 0.45743 2250 5736
27175 -0.7 -0.78 0.45743 2250 5736
27176 -0.7 -0.72 0.45743 2250 5736
27177 -0.7 -0.7 0.45743 2250 5736
27178 -0.7 -0.69 0.45743 2250 5736
27179 -0.7 -0.67 0.45743 2250 5736
27180 -0.7 -0.67 0.45743 2250 5736
27181 -0.7 -0.66 0.45743 2250 5736
27182 -0.7 -0.72 0.45743 2250 5736
27183 -0.7 -0.68 0.45743 2250 5736
27184 -0.7 -0.63 0.45743 2250 5736
27186 -0.7 0.72 -0.38816 2250 5736
27187 -0.7 0.71 -0.38816 2250 5736
27188 -0.7 0.71 -0.38816 2250 5736
27189 -0.7 0.7 -0.38816 2250 5736
27190 -0.7 0.69 -0.38816 2250 5736
27191 -0.7 0.69 -0.38816 2250 5736
27192 -0.7 0.68 -0.38816 2250 5736
27193 -0.7 0.69 -0.38816 2250 5736
27194 -0.7 0.7 -0.38816 2250 5736
27195 -0.7 0.69 -0.38816 2250 5736
27113 0.61 0.68 0.45743 2250 5736


Phi_Angle_CM_Frame for Positive and Negative Target Polarization

Helcode # Negative Target Polarization Positive Target Polarization
1 h>0 PT negative & helcode 1 phi angle cm frame.gif PT positive & helcode 1 phi angle cm frame.gif
2 h<0 PT negative & helcode 2 phi angle cm frame.gif PT positive & helcode 2 phi angle cm frame.gif
3 PT negative & helcode 3 phi angle cm frame.gif PT positive & helcode 3 phi angle cm frame.gif
4 PT negative & helcode 4 phi angle cm frame.gif PT positive & helcode 4 phi angle cm frame.gif


Helicity Difference Plots for Pt>0 and Pt<0

Helicity Difference Negative Target Polarization Positive Target Polarization
h1-h4 Phi angle cm helicity difference for h1 h4 negative PT.gif Phi angle cm helicity difference for h1 h4 positive PT.gif
h3-h2 Phi angle cm helicity difference for h3 h2 negative PT.gif Phi angle cm helicity difference for h3 h2 positive PT.gif



5-01-2009

Target and Beam Polarization are positive

Helcode # Negative Beam Torus Positive Beam Torus
1 h>0 BT negative & helcode 1 phi angle cm frame PbPt positive.gif BT positive & helcode 1 phi angle cm frame PbPt positive.gif
2 h<0 BT negative & helcode 2 phi angle cm frame PbPt positive.gif BT positive & helcode 2 phi angle cm frame PbPt positive.gif
3 BT negative & helcode 3 phi angle cm frame PbPt positive.gif BT positive & helcode 3 phi angle cm frame PbPt positive.gif
4 BT negative & helcode 4 phi angle cm frame PbPt positive.gif BT positive & helcode 4 phi angle cm frame PbPt positive.gif



Target Polarization Positive and Beam Polarization Negative

Helcode # Negative Beam Torus Positive Beam Torus
1 h>0 No Data BT positive & helcode 1 phi angle cm frame Pt positive Pb negative.gif
2 h<0 No Data BT positive & helcode 2 phi angle cm frame Pt positive Pb negative.gif
3 No Data BT positive & helcode 3 phi angle cm frame Pt positive Pb negative.gif
4 No Data BT positive & helcode 4 phi angle cm frame Pt positive Pb negative.gif


Inclusive Histograms For Invariant Mass

Invariant Mass Histograms for Each Sector

All helicities

InvariantMass sector 1.gifInvariantMass sector 2.gif
InvariantMass sector 3.gifInvariantMass sector 4.gif
InvariantMass sector 5.gifInvariantMass sector 6.gif


InvariantMass sector 1 gaussian.gifInvariantMass sector 2 gaussian.gif
InvariantMass sector 3 gaussian.gifInvariantMass sector 4 gaussian.gif
InvariantMass sector 5 gaussian.gifInvariantMass sector 6 gaussian.gif

Helcode=1

InvariantMass sector 1 H1.gifInvariantMass sector 2 H1.gif
InvariantMass sector 3 H1.gifInvariantMass sector 4 H1.gif
InvariantMass sector 5 H1.gifInvariantMass sector 6 H1.gif

3/20/09

InvariantMass W difference Coupleoffiles 26992.gif

InvariantMass W difference Coupleoffiles 26993.gif

InvariantMass W difference Coupleoffiles 26994.gif

1.) plot Wdiff

2.) plot PE using Osipenko/Josh cuts




06/6/09

Invariant Mass

Difference of Invariant Mass for two differnet cuts:

Run Number EC Cuts+ requiring pion OSI Cuts EC Cuts
26991 Missing mass difference RunNumber26991 1.gif Missing mass difference RunNumber26991 1 OSICuts.gif

Missing mass difference RunNumber26991 1ECuts.gif 


On x-axis of FC difference between the "+" heliciy FC  and the "-" helicity FC.
Run Number W difference FC difference End of Run sum [math]\equiv \frac {\sum_i(FC(i)^+) - \sum(FC(i)^-)}{\sum (FC(i)^+) + \sum(FC(i)^-)})[/math]
26991 Missing mass difference RunNumber26991 1 OSICuts.gif 150px 0.00354260538 [math]\pm[/math] 0.00001050400
26994 Missing mass difference RunNumber26994 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26994 OSICuts.gif 0.00367 [math]\pm[/math] 0.00001088263
26993 Missing mass difference RunNumber26993 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26993 OSICuts.gif 0.002559223 [math]\pm[/math] 0.00001120796
26992 Missing mass difference RunNumber26992 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26992 OSICuts.gif 0.003781[math]\pm[/math]0.00001090044
26990 Missing mass difference RunNumber26990 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26990 OSICuts.gif 0.00331986321[math]\pm[/math]0.00001203387
26989 Missing mass difference RunNumber26989 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26989 OSICuts.gif 0.00303841557[math]\pm[/math]0.00001267152
26988 Missing mass difference RunNumber26988 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26988 OSICuts.gif 0.00380169243[math]\pm[/math]0.00001097470
26987 Missing mass difference RunNumber26987 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26987 OSICuts.gif 0.00280163240[math]\pm[/math]0.00001515270
26986 Missing mass difference RunNumber26986 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26986 OSICuts.gif 0.00352882616[math]\pm[/math]0.00000048897
26979 Missing mass difference RunNumber26979 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26979 OSICuts.gif -0.00373104126[math]\pm[/math]0.00001531706
26965 Missing mass difference RunNumber26965 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26965 OSICuts.gif 0.00454140439[math]\pm[/math]0.00001534923
26964 Missing mass difference RunNumber26964 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26964 OSICuts.gif 0.00509434283[math]\pm[/math]0.00001557226
26963 Missing mass difference RunNumber26963 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26963 OSICuts.gif 0.00405285155[math]\pm[/math]0.00001575049
26961 Missing mass difference RunNumber26961 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26961 OSICuts.gif 0.00507456102 [math]\pm[/math]0.00001682744
26959 Missing mass difference RunNumber26959 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26959 OSICuts.gif 0.00523761694[math]\pm[/math]0.00001488890
26958 Missing mass difference RunNumber26958 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26958 OSICuts.gif 0.00444205478[math]\pm[/math] 0.00001577510
26956 Missing mass difference RunNumber26956 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26956 OSICuts.gif 0.00504401620[math]\pm[/math]0.00001565456
26955 Missing mass difference RunNumber26955 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26955 OSICuts.gif 0.00559913829[math]\pm[/math]0.00001425736
26954 Missing mass difference RunNumber26954 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26954 OSICuts.gif 0.00494690728[math]\pm[/math]0.00001443107
26953 Missing mass difference RunNumber26953 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26953 OSICuts.gif 0.00562598448[math]\pm[/math]0.00001525797
26952 Missing mass difference RunNumber26952 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26952 OSICuts.gif 0.00485295834[math]\pm[/math]0.00001293033
26951 Missing mass difference RunNumber26951 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26951 OSICuts.gif 0.00545485906[math]\pm[/math]0.00001558637
26947 Missing mass difference RunNumber26947 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26947 OSICuts.gif 0.00465697160[math]\pm[/math]0.00001144285
26945 Missing mass difference RunNumber26945 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26945 OSICuts.gif -0.00556456389[math]\pm[/math] 0.00001389870
26943 Missing mass difference RunNumber26943 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26943 OSICuts.gif -0.00656109472[math]\pm[/math]0.00001540342
26942 Missing mass difference RunNumber26942 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26942 OSICuts.gif -0.00669169106[math]\pm[/math]0.00001526771
26941 Missing mass difference RunNumber26941 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26941 OSICuts.gif -0.00676460417[math]\pm[/math]0.00001100372
26940 Missing mass difference RunNumber26940 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26940 OSICuts.gif -0.00643597022 [math]\pm[/math]0.00001397207
26939 Missing mass difference RunNumber26939 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26939 OSICuts.gif -0.00650047456[math]\pm[/math]0.00001405001
26938 Missing mass difference RunNumber26938 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26938 OSICuts.gif -0.00632630313[math]\pm[/math]0.00001411839
26937 Missing mass difference RunNumber26937 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26937 OSICuts.gif -0.00533169794[math]\pm[/math]0.00001417768
26934 Missing mass difference RunNumber26934 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26934 OSICuts.gif -0.00601497156[math]\pm[/math]0.00001422560
26933 Missing mass difference RunNumber26933 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26933 OSICuts.gif -0.00586540500[math]\pm[/math]0.00001414938
26932 Missing mass difference RunNumber26932 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26932 OSICuts.gif -0.00587687192[math]\pm[/math]0.00001383218
26931 Missing mass difference RunNumber26931 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26931 OSICuts.gif -0.00630232566[math]\pm[/math]0.00001495053
26930 Missing mass difference RunNumber26930 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26930 OSICuts.gif -0.00684205010[math]\pm[/math]0.00001541629
26929 Missing mass difference RunNumber26929 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26929 OSICuts.gif -0.00521666944[math]\pm[/math]0.00001555256
26928 Missing mass difference RunNumber26928 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26928 OSICuts.gif -0.00682185316[math]\pm[/math]0.00001536552
26927 Missing mass difference RunNumber26927 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26927 OSICuts.gif -0.00599647483[math]\pm[/math]0.00001538040
26926 Missing mass difference RunNumber26926 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26926 OSICuts.gif -0.00649932378[math]\pm[/math]0.00001302331
26925 Missing mass difference RunNumber26925 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber26925 OSICuts.gif -0.00575464099[math]\pm[/math]0.00001530219
27079 Missing mass difference RunNumber27079 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27079 OSICuts.gif -0.01025869470[math]\pm[/math]0.00002322298
27078 Missing mass difference RunNumber27078 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27078 OSICuts.gif -0.01128036266[math]\pm[/math]0.00002135573
27075 Missing mass difference RunNumber27075 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27075 OSICuts.gif -0.01037443017[math]\pm[/math]0.00002113646
27109 Missing mass difference RunNumber27109 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27109 OSICuts.gif -0.00876887465[math]\pm[/math]0.00002411331
27107 Missing mass difference RunNumber27107 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27107 OSICuts.gif 0.01044530752[math]\pm[/math]0.00002188631
27116 Missing mass difference RunNumber27116 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27116 OSICuts.gif 0.00173242954[math]\pm[/math]0.00003084415
27112 Missing mass difference RunNumber27112 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27112 OSICuts.gif -0.01142682761[math]\pm[/math]0.00002505827
27111 Missing mass difference RunNumber27111 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27111 OSICuts.gif -0.00872760886[math]\pm[/math]0.00002117268
27128 Missing mass difference RunNumber27128 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27128 OSICuts.gif 0.00193441756[math]\pm[/math]0.00002177434
27127 Missing mass difference RunNumber27127 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27127 OSICuts.gif 0.00215712098[math]\pm[/math]0.00002186032
27124 Missing mass difference RunNumber27124 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27124 OSICuts.gif 0.00309070808[math]\pm[/math]0.00002235601
27139 Missing mass difference RunNumber27139 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27139 OSICuts.gif -0.00288862444[math]\pm[/math]0.00002683943
27138 Missing mass difference RunNumber27138 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27138 OSICuts.gif -0.00061608634[math]\pm[/math]0.00002396188
27137 Missing mass difference RunNumber27137 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27137 OSICuts.gif -0.00275066778[math]\pm[/math]0.00002150471
27136 Missing mass difference RunNumber27136 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27136 OSICuts.gif -0.00239423237[math]\pm[/math]0.00002151354
27134 Missing mass difference RunNumber27134 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27134 OSICuts.gif -0.00355581434[math]\pm[/math]0.00002051114
27133 Missing mass difference RunNumber27133 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27133 OSICuts.gif -0.00252193724[math]\pm[/math]0.00002181781
27132 Missing mass difference RunNumber27132 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27132 OSICuts.gif 0.00096332202[math]\pm[/math]0.00002224348
27143 Missing mass difference RunNumber27143 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27143 OSICuts.gif -0.00210486278[math]\pm[/math]0.00002838738
27141 Missing mass difference RunNumber27141 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27141 OSICuts.gif -0.00301990556[math]\pm[/math]0.00002515365
27160 Missing mass difference RunNumber27160 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27160 OSICuts.gif 0.00171264744[math]\pm[/math]0.00002170610
27161 Missing mass difference RunNumber27161 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27161 OSICuts.gif 0.00224287304[math]\pm[/math]0.00002374488
27162 Missing mass difference RunNumber27162 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27162 OSICuts.gif 0.00118844445[math]\pm[/math]0.00002480837
27166 Missing mass difference RunNumber27166 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27166 OSICuts.gif 0.00077237006[math]\pm[/math]0.00002247548
27167 Missing mass difference RunNumber27167 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27167 OSICuts.gif 0.00216041281[math]\pm[/math]0.00002188669
27168 Missing mass difference RunNumber27168 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27168 OSICuts.gif 0.00083650625[math]\pm[/math]0.00002173328
27170 Missing mass difference RunNumber27170 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27170 OSICuts.gif 0.00151247511[math]\pm[/math]0.00002430185
27175 Missing mass difference RunNumber27175 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27175 OSICuts.gif -0.01217485668[math]\pm[/math]0.00002235229
27176 Missing mass difference RunNumber27176 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27176 OSICuts.gif -0.01049635167[math]\pm[/math]0.00002127680
27177 Missing mass difference RunNumber27177 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27177 OSICuts.gif -0.01147445288[math]\pm[/math]0.00002149007
27179 Missing mass difference RunNumber27179 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27179 OSICuts.gif -0.01025340153[math]\pm[/math]0.00002206557
27180 Missing mass difference RunNumber27180 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27180 OSICuts.gif -0.00868272418[math]\pm[/math]0.00002169057
27181 Missing mass difference RunNumber27181 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27181 OSICuts.gif -0.00973324188[math]\pm[/math]0.00002374079
27182 Missing mass difference RunNumber27182 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27182 OSICuts.gif -0.00983862460[math]\pm[/math]0.00002233926
27183 Missing mass difference RunNumber27183 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27183 OSICuts.gif -0.01901615252[math]\pm[/math]0.00002135060
27186 Missing mass difference RunNumber27186 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27186 OSICuts.gif 0.01079090635[math]\pm[/math]0.00002093983
27187 Missing mass difference RunNumber27187 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27187 OSICuts.gif 0.01155519076[math]\pm[/math]0.00002157075
27188 Missing mass difference RunNumber27188 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27188 OSICuts.gif 0.01086898605[math]\pm[/math]0.00002089859
27190 Missing mass difference RunNumber27190 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27190 OSICuts.gif 0.01181266490[math]\pm[/math]0.00002159430
27192 Missing mass difference RunNumber27192 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27192 OSICuts.gif -0.00988459637[math]\pm[/math]0.00002151795
27193 Missing mass difference RunNumber27193 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27193 OSICuts.gif -0.01047643036[math]\pm[/math]0.00002159742
27194 Missing mass difference RunNumber27194 1 OSICuts.gif FC difference RunNumber27194 OSICuts.gif -0.01185520003[math]\pm[/math]0.00002134810


RunNumber vs FCAsymmetry EndofRunSum.jpg

NPHE

To find out pion contamination in the electron sample i used Osipenko geometrical cuts. The number of photoelectrons before and after osipenko cuts are shown below:

No cuts OSI Cuts
The number of photoelectrons without cuts
The number of photoelectrons with OSI cuts


For different fits:

The number of photoelectrons after OSICuts with two Gaussian fits
The number of photoelectrons after OSICuts with Landau+Gaussian fits

06/11/09

Pion Contamination

No cuts OSI Cuts (Gauss(0)+Landau(3)+Gauss(6)) OSI Cuts (Gauss(0)+Gauss(3)) OSICuts + NPHE>2.5 (Gauss)
The number of photoelectrons without cuts
The number of photoelectrons with OSI cuts(gauss+landau+gauss)
The number of photoelectrons with OSI cuts two gaussian fits
The number of photoelectrons with OSI+NPHE cuts


OSICuts (Gauss(0)+Landau(3)+Gauss(6))

Assuming that the two gaussians represent number of photoelectrons and landau number of photons produced by high energy pions, the ratio of number of pions over the sum of electrons and pion in the electron candidate sample can be calculated in the following way:

OSIcut

Electrons nphe with OSIcuts all data Gauss0.gifElectrons nphe with OSIcuts all data Landau3.gifElectrons nphe with OSIcuts all data Gauss6.gif

[math] Pion Contamination = [/math]
[math] = \frac {Integral(landau(3))}{Integral(gauss(0) + landau(3) + gauss(6))} =[/math]
[math] = \frac{1.643 \times 10^9}{ 7.682 \times 10^9 + 1.643 \times 10^9 + 7.732 \times 10^9} = [/math]
[math] = 9.6324 % [/math]

OSICut+NPHE>2.5

Electrons nphe with OSIcuts all data Gauss0nphe2-5.gifElectrons nphe with OSIcuts all data Landau3nphe2-5.gifElectrons nphe with OSIcuts all data Gauss6nphe2-5.gif


[math] Pion Contamination = [/math]
[math] = \frac {Integral(landau(3))}{Integral(gauss(0) + landau(3) + gauss(6))} =[/math]
[math] = \frac{5.905 \times 10^8}{ 6.656 \times 10^9 + 5.905 \times 10^8 + 7.395 \times 10^9} = [/math]
[math] = 4.03305% [/math]

OSICuts (Gauss(0)+Gauss(3))

In case of only two gaussians, the number of photoelectrons produced by pions is described by Gauss(0) and the number of photoelectrons created by electrons is Gauss(3). Pion contamination is calculated below for both cases, without and with NPHE>2.5 cut.

OSICut

Electrons nphe with OSIcuts all data twogaussians Gauss0.gifElectrons nphe with OSIcuts all data twogaussians Gauss3.gif

[math] Pion Contamination = [/math]
[math] = \frac {Integral(gauss(0))}{Integral(gauss(0) + gauss(3))} =[/math]
[math] = \frac{2.151 \times 10^8}{ 2.151 \times 10^8 + 1.594 \times 10^{10} } [/math]
[math] = 1.3 % [/math]

With NPHE>2.5 Cut

[math] Pion Contamination = 0 [/math]

Number of Events after NPHE>2.5 Cut

[math] Number of Events after NPHE\gt 2.5 Cut [/math] =
[math] = \frac{2.978 \times 10^8}{3.496 \times 10^8} = [/math]
[math] = 85.18 % [/math]

Counts in FCup

FCupCountsForHelicity+ 29679 13 OSICuts Alldata.gifFCupCountsForHelicity- 29679 24 OSICuts Alldata.gif

[math]Ratio of Counts 24/13 = \frac{2.131 \times 10^6}{2.116 \times 10^6} = 1.007 [/math]

6/12/09

1.) Improve Chi^2 in NPe fits.

2.) Calculate uncertainty in pion contamination measurement by changing mean and widths according to fit error.

3.) Pulse pair FC asymmetry, and End of Run accumulated FC asym.

pulse pair [math]\equiv \sum_i(\frac{FC(i)^+ - FC(i)^-}{FC(i)^+ + FC(i)^-})[/math]

End of Run sum [math]\equiv \frac {\sum_i(FC(i)^+) - \sum(FC(i)^-)}{\sum (FC(i)^+) + \sum(FC(i)^-)})[/math]

4.) Determine semi-inclusive statistic as function of X

Uncertainty in Pion Contamination

Maximum

Electrons nphe with OSIcuts all data Gauss0MAX.gifElectrons nphe with OSIcuts all data Landau3MAX.gifElectrons nphe with OSIcuts all data Gauss6MAX.gif

[math] Pion Contamination = [/math]
[math] = \frac {Integral(landau(3))}{Integral(gauss(0) + landau(3) + gauss(6))} =[/math]
[math] = \frac{1.645 \times 10^9}{ 7.695 \times 10^9 + 1.645 \times 10^9 + 7.745 \times 10^9} = [/math]
[math] = 9.6283 % [/math]

Electrons nphe with OSIcuts all data Gauss0MAX nphe2-5cut.gifElectrons nphe with OSIcuts all data Landau3MAX nphe2-5cut.gifElectrons nphe with OSIcuts all data Gauss6MAX nphe2-5cut.gif

[math] Pion Contamination = [/math]
[math] = \frac {Integral(landau(3))}{Integral(gauss(0) + landau(3) + gauss(6))} =[/math]
[math] = \frac{5.914 \times 10^8}{ 6.666 \times 10^9 + 5.914 \times 10^8 + 7.427 \times 10^9} = [/math]
[math] = 4.02740 % [/math]

Minimum

Electrons nphe with OSIcuts all data Gauss0MIN.gifElectrons nphe with OSIcuts all data Landau3MIN.gifElectrons nphe with OSIcuts all data Gauss6MIN.gif

[math] Pion Contamination = [/math]
[math] = \frac {Integral(landau(3))}{Integral(gauss(0) + landau(3) + gauss(6))} =[/math]
[math] = \frac{1.642 \times 10^9}{ 7.67 \times 10^9 + 1.642 \times 10^9 + 7.719 \times 10^9} = [/math]
[math] = 9.64124 % [/math]

Electrons nphe with OSIcuts all data Gauss0MIN nphe2-5cut.gifElectrons nphe with OSIcuts all data Landau3MIN nphe2-5cut.gifElectrons nphe with OSIcuts all data Gauss6MIN nphe2-5cut.gif

[math] Pion Contamination = [/math]
[math] = \frac {Integral(landau(3))}{Integral(gauss(0) + landau(3) + gauss(6))} =[/math]
[math] = \frac{5.895 \times 10^8}{ 6.645 \times 10^9 + 5.895 \times 10^8 + 7.401 \times 10^9} = [/math]
[math] = 4.02788 % [/math]

Pion Contamination

It appears that pion contamination in electron sample is 9.63 % [math]\pm[/math] 0.01 % before nphe cut and after nphe>2.5 cut contamination is about 4.029% [math]\pm[/math] 0.003.

X_bjorken

1). alldataOSICuts_X.root - OSICuts applied.
2). alldataOSICuts_X_epx.root - OSICuts applied and electron and pion are required.
3). alldataOSICuts_X_epxnphe.root - OSICut and nphe>2.5 cuts applied and electron and pion are required.
4). alldataX_epxwithoutcuts - No cuts, electron and pion required.

X bjorken withoutcuts electronpionrequired.gifX bjorken OSICuts electronpionrequired.gifX bjorken OSINPHECuts electronpionrequired.gif
Qsqrd withoutcuts electronpionrequired.gifQsqrd OSICuts electronpionrequired.gifQsqrd OSINPHECuts electronpionrequired.gif


Number of Events after cuts
No Cuts OSI Cuts OSI+NPHE>2.5 Cuts
[math]6.724 \times 10^7[/math] [math]4.606 \times 10^7[/math] [math]3.868 \times 10^7[/math]
68.5 % 57.5 %


Error Calculation

Tthe error in the asymmetry measurement would be [math]\frac{\Delta A}{A} = \frac{2}{\sqrt{N}}[/math]

X_b [math] Number(X_b)^+[/math] [math] Number(X_b)^-[/math] X_b Asymmetry Error
0.1 [math]5.25 \times 10^6[/math] [math]5.25 \times 10^6[/math] [math]-4.001 \times 10^{-4}[/math] 0.00087251693
0.2 [math]5.52 \times 10^6[/math] [math]5.3 \times 10^6[/math] [math]-7.86 \times 10^{-4}[/math] 0.0008507530911145
0.3 [math]3.496 \times 10^6[/math] [math]3.50 \times 10^6[/math] [math]-9.025 \times 10^{-4}[/math] 1.0691459e-03
0.4 [math]2.0379 \times 10^6[/math] [math]2.04 \times 10^6[/math] [math]-8.37 \times 10^{-4}[/math] 0.0014004231
0.5 [math]1.14 \times 10^6[/math] [math]1.15 \times 10^6[/math] [math]-2.978 \times 10^{-4}[/math] 0.0018665742
0.6 [math]6.37\times 10^5[/math] [math]6.38 \times 10^5[/math] [math]-1.115 \times 10^{-3}[/math] 0.0016477095
0.7 [math]3.514 \times 10^5[/math] [math]3.519 \times 10^5[/math] [math]-8.26 \times 10^{-3}[/math] 0.0022190018
0.8 [math]2.022 \times 10^5[/math] [math] 2.042 \times 10^5[/math] [math]-5.039 \times 10^{-3}[/math] 0.00291609
0.9 [math]1.348 \times 10^5[/math] [math]1.34 \times 10^5[/math] [math]2.935 \times 10^{-3}[/math] 0.003592967
1 [math]1.038 \times 10^5[/math] [math]1.033 \times 10^5[/math] [math]2.47 \times 10^{-3}[/math] 0.0040928449

X b vs Asymmetry OSICUTs+NPHE2-5 1.jpg 


I am pretty sure X_{BJ} > 0.8 is not possible with our data set

Electron theta angle and [math]Q^2[/math] cuts

electron theta angle for different X_b

ElectronThetaAgle less0-8X b.gifElectronThetaAgle above0-8X b.gif

[math]Q^2[/math]

Q^2 less0-8X b.gifQ^2 above0-8X b.gif

X_b when [math]Q^2 \lt 1[/math]

X b forQ2less1 onefile.gif


X b NumberofEventsAbove0-8X b.gif

Number of Events for X_b>0.8 [math] = \frac{3531}{313537} = 1.1 %[/math] 

plot the vertex of the above hits with X>0.8

X b OSI+EC+NPHE allcuts.gif 

change below to log plots so we can see where XBj stops

X b OSI+EC+NPHE allcuts and withoutcuts.gifX b OSI+EC+NPHE allcuts and withoutcuts LogScale.gif

10/23/09

After Months of working on detectors and writing thesis proposal it is now time to start doing some physics.

1.) Determine how pion contamination uncertainty changes when you change fit parameters by 1 S.D., 2 S.D., and 3 S.D.

2.) FC asymm plots

3.) Vertex plot for X > 0.8 events.

4.) Now that we have good electron cuts. Plot statistics for Pion cuts.

5.) After pion cuts we start looking add paddle efficiencies so we can subtract sem-inclusive rates using individual paddles but opposite magnetic fields.


Xbjorken

Vertex plot for X > 0.8 events and others

I chose 1<Q^2<4 cut because we used it to plot phi angle in cm frame vs relative rate to compare with the results in paper.

Cuts X_bjorken [math]Q^2[/math] Vertex X Vertex Y Vertex Z
OSI Cuts + EC Cuts X b Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif Q 2 Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif Vertex x Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif Vertex y Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif Vertex z Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif
OSI Cuts + EC Cuts + X_b>0.8 X bgreater0-8 Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif Q 2greater0-8 Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif Vertex xgreater0-8 Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif Vertex ygreater0-8 Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif Vertex zgreater0-8 Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif
OSI Cuts + EC Cuts + X_b<0.8 X bless0-8 Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif Q 2less0-8 Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif Vertex xless0-8 Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif Vertex yless0-8 Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif Vertex zless0-8 Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif
OSI Cuts + EC Cuts + 1<Q^2<4 X bQcut Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif Q 2Qcut Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif Vertex xQcut Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif Vertex yQcut Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif Vertex zQcut Run26994 OSI+EC allx.gif


Cuts The scattered electron energy [math]\theta[/math] electron scattering angle
[math]X_b \gt 0.8[/math] Scattered electron energy 1.gif Theta electron scattering angle 1.gif
[math]X_b \lt 0.8[/math] Scattered electron energy 2.gif Theta electron scattering angle 2.gif

FC Asymmetry

FC Asymmetry plot using the following method : End of Run sum [math]\equiv \frac {\sum_i(FC(i)^+) - \sum(FC(i)^-)}{\sum (FC(i)^+) + \sum(FC(i)^-)})[/math]

RunNumber vs FCAsymmetry EndofRunSum.jpg


Pion contamination

Determine how pion contamination uncertainty changes when you change fit parameters by 1 S.D., 2 S.D., and 3 S.D.

Pion contamination(3 S.D.) in electron sample is 9.645 % [math]\pm[/math] 0.025%.

It doesnt really change from using 1 S.D.

Pion Statistics

Before and after cuts the plot of EC_tot/P vs nphe(for pions)

Ectotpvsnphebefore.gifEctotpvsnpheafter.gif


10/30/09

After Months of working on detectors and writing thesis proposal it is now time to start doing some physics.

1.) Determine how pion contamination uncertainty changes when you change fit parameters by 1 S.D., 2 S.D., and 3 S.D.

2.) Do pulse pair FC asymm plot

3.) Check program's calculation of event with X > 0.8 events. and compare to similar event with X < 0.8

4.) Use statistics for Pion cuts to estimate SIDIS statistical error -vs- Xbj

5.) After pion cuts we start looking add paddle efficiencies so we can subtract sem-inclusive rates using individual paddles but opposite magnetic fields.


1.)

1.) Determine how pion contamination uncertainty changes when you change fit parameters by 1 S.D., 2 S.D., and 3 S.D.

In case of 10 S.D. : [math]9.446 % \pm 0.233 %[/math] && [math]3.76 % \pm 0.08 %[/math]

3.)

[math]X_b\gt 0.8[/math]

 I suspect the X_b >0.8 event below are pions mis-identified as electrons

To figure out.  Write down event number for events below as well as run number and file name.  The use path length and Scintillator TDC  time to determine beta under assumption that particle is a pion.   Does the momentum and energy make sense?  Download the cooked data file from JLab for these events so we can use CED to look at them and bosdump to look at the reconstruction.
  • 1
       Ebeam=5736
       IBeam=4.2
       ITorus=2248
       ITarg=122
       BeamPol=0.71
       TargetPol=-0.67
       BadRun=0
       Target=18
       PolPlate=0
       Version=2
       Prescalers:0:0:0:0:0:0:0
dump=13
W= 1.3504
Q= 4.78723
final electron energy= 2.6823
initial electron energy= 5.736
electron theta angle= 32.3896
  • 2
       Ebeam=5736
       IBeam=4.2
       ITorus=2248
       ITarg=122
       BeamPol=0.71
       TargetPol=-0.67
       BadRun=0
       Target=18
       PolPlate=0
       Version=2
       Prescalers:0:0:0:0:0:0:0
dump=13
W= 1.41085
Q= 5.1186
final electron energy= 2.41678
initial electron energy= 5.736
electron theta angle= 35.3749
  • 3
       Ebeam=5736
       IBeam=4.2
       ITorus=2248
       ITarg=122
       BeamPol=0.71
       TargetPol=-0.67
       BadRun=0
       Target=18
       PolPlate=0
       Version=2
       Prescalers:0:0:0:0:0:0:0
dump=13
W= 1.2575
Q= 4.83661
final electron energy= 2.7851
initial electron energy= 5.736
electron theta angle= 31.9378

[math]X_b\lt 0.8[/math]

  • 1
W= 3.07188
Q= 0.229403
final electron energy= 1.0543
initial electron energy= 5.736
electron theta angle= 11.177
  • 2
hit return for next event, q to quit: 
W= 2.48202
Q= 1.382
final electron energy= 2.18587
initial electron energy= 5.736
electron theta angle= 19.1106
  • 3
hit return for next event, q to quit: 
W= 2.92788
Q= 0.274895
final electron energy= 1.49046
initial electron energy= 5.736
electron theta angle= 10.2878

4.)

[math]\pi^+[/math] && [math]B^+[/math] [math]\pi^-[/math] && [math]B^+[/math] [math]\pi^-[/math] && [math]B^-[/math] [math]\pi^+[/math] && [math]B^-[/math]
Positivetorusmagnet positivepion.gif Positivetorusmagnet negativepion.gif Negativetorusmagnet negativepion.gif Negativetorusmagnet positivepion.gif

1-12-09

Root files: alldatasector26990_4.root, alldatasector26990_5.root, alldatasector27113_4.root, alldatasector27113_5.root.

9/13/09

1.) Determine how pion contamination uncertainty changes when you change fit parameters.


Fit parameters Pion Contamination
1 S. D. 9.63 % [math]\pm[/math] 0.01 %
3 S. D. 9.645 % [math]\pm[/math] 0.025 %
10 S. D. 9.446 % [math]\pm[/math] 0.0233 %

2.) Do pulse pair FC asymm plot

I did it for one file(dst27113_00.B00) and it was zero.

3.) Check program's calculation of event with X > 0.8 events. and compare to similar event with X < 0.8 


 I suspect the X_b >0.8 event below are pions mis-identified as electrons

To figure out.  Write down event number for events below as well as run number and file name.  
The use path length and Scintillator TDC  time to determine beta under assumption that particle is a 
pion.   Does the momentum and energy make sense?  Download the cooked data file from JLab for 
these events so we can use CED to look at them and bosdump to look at the reconstruction.


Calculation is right, need to check CED, but dont have it on daq.


4.) Use statistics for Pion cuts to estimate SIDIS statistical error -vs- Xbj

Insert table with X bj, number of reconstructed pions, statistical error.


no cut

root alldatasector27113_5_1.root

Alldatasector27113 5 1 root.gif 

root [9] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(2);
(const Double_t)3.50713558335003626e+01
root [10] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(2);
(const Double_t)1.23000000000000000e+03

root [11] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(3);
(const Double_t)1.85200000000000000e+03
root [12] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(3);  
(const Double_t)4.30348695827000256e+01

root [13] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(4);
(const Double_t)3.06431068920891256e+01
root [14] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(4);
(const Double_t)9.39000000000000000e+02

root [15] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(5);
(const Double_t)3.68000000000000000e+02
root [16] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(5);  
(const Double_t)1.91833260932508765e+01

(const Double_t)1.91833260932508765e+01
root [17] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(6);
(const Double_t)1.14017542509913792e+01
root [18] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(6);
(const Double_t)1.30000000000000000e+02

root [19] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(7);
(const Double_t)4.10000000000000000e+01
root [20] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(7);  
(const Double_t)6.40312423743284853e+00

root [21] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(8);
(const Double_t)3.74165738677394133e+00
root [22] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(8);
(const Double_t)1.40000000000000000e+01

root [23] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(9);
(const Double_t)5.00000000000000000e+00
root [24] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(9);  
(const Double_t)2.23606797749978981e+00

root [25] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(10);
(const Double_t)1.41421356237309515e+00
root [26] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(10);
(const Double_t)2.00000000000000000e+00

with cut

root alldatasector27113_5.root


Alldatasector27113 5 root.gif 

root [3] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(2);
(const Double_t)2.89827534923788761e+01
root [4] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(2);                           
(const Double_t)8.40000000000000000e+02



root [5] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(3);  
(const Double_t)3.77491721763537456e+01
root [6] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(3);
(const Double_t)1.42500000000000000e+03



root [7] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(4);  
(const Double_t)2.82488937836510701e+01
root [8] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(4);
(const Double_t)7.98000000000000000e+02

root [9] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(5);  
(const Double_t)1.81107702762748346e+01
root [10] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(5);
(const Double_t)3.28000000000000000e+02


root [11] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(6);  
(const Double_t)1.04880884817015154e+01
root [12] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(6);
(const Double_t)1.10000000000000000e+02



root [13] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(7);  
(const Double_t)6.24499799839839831e+00
root [14] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(7);
(const Double_t)3.90000000000000000e+01



root [15] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(8);  
(const Double_t)3.60555127546398912e+00
root [16] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(8);
(const Double_t)1.30000000000000000e+01



root [17] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(9);  
(const Double_t)1.73205080756887719e+00
root [18] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(9);
(const Double_t)3.00000000000000000e+00



root [19] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(10); 
(const Double_t)0.00000000000000000e+00
root [20] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(10);
(const Double_t)0.00000000000000000e+00



root [21] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(11);  
(const Double_t)0.00000000000000000e+00
root [22] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(11);
(const Double_t)0.00000000000000000e+00



root [23] .p X_bjorken->GetBinError(12);  
(const Double_t)0.00000000000000000e+00
root [24] .p X_bjorken->GetBinContent(12);
(const Double_t)0.00000000000000000e+00



[math]x_b[/math] Error
0.1 0.034503278
0.2 0.026490647
0.3 0.035399616
0.4 4.255675067
0.5 0.095346259
0.6 0.160128154
0.7 0.277350098
0.8 0.577350269


5.) After pion cuts we start looking add paddle efficiencies so we can subtract sem-inclusive rates using individual paddles but opposite magnetic fields.


Your B-field sign change does effect paddle distribution?

The table below represents the distribution of electrons and pions on the scintillator paddles using the reaction

e(p/d,e')\pi X

File number electron electron [math]\pi^+[/math] [math]\pi^-[/math]
26990, B<0 Electron26990 4.gif Electron26990 5.gif 4pion26990.gif 5pion26990.gif
27113, B>0 Electron27113 4.gif Electron27113 5.gif 4pion27113.gif 5pion27113.gif
  • 1.) 7< Sector_paddle <11 - (B>0, [math]\pi^-[/math]) - 15.3% && (B<0, [math]\pi^+[/math]) - 10.9%
  • 2.) 25< Sector_paddle <29 - (B>0, [math]\pi^+[/math]) - 7.775% && (B<0, [math]\pi^-[/math]) - 10.97%

[math]\frac{\Delta d}{d}[/math] && [math]\frac{\Delta d}{d}[/math]

Using Two runs: 26990(NH3, -2250) and 27124(ND3, +2250)

root files: alldatasector27124_4.root && alldatasector27124_5.root

root files: alldatasector26990_4.root && alldatasector26990_5.root


alldatasector26990_4.root

Pion Paddle Number

Negative Torus

Using runs with NH3 target

Detected particles in the final state Pion Paddle Number X_b vs pion paddle number Chosen pion paddle number
[math]e^-[/math] && [math]\pi^+[/math] PositivepionpaddlenumberNH3.gif X b vs positivepionpaddlenumberNH3.gif 7
[math]e^-[/math] && [math]\pi^-[/math] NegativepionpaddlenumberNH3.gif X b vs negativepionpaddlenumberNH3.gif 27


Detected particles in the final state and chosen pion paddle number [math]e^-[/math] paddle number [math]X_b[/math] vs [math]e^-[/math] paddle number [math]X_b[/math] vs [math]e^-[/math] paddle number when [math]x_b\lt 0.3[/math] [math]X_b[/math] vs [math]e^-[/math] paddle number when [math]x_b\gt 0.3[/math]
[math]e^-[/math] && [math]\pi^+[/math], [math]PaddleNumber_{\pi^+}=7[/math] Electronpaddlenumberforpositivepionpaddlenumber7.gif X b vs electronpaddlenumberforpositivepionpaddlenumber7.gif X b vs electronpaddlenumberforpositivepionpaddlenumber7lowX b.gif X b vs electronpaddlenumberforpositivepionpaddlenumber7highX b.gif
[math]e^-[/math] && [math]\pi^-[/math], [math]PaddleNumber_{\pi^-}=27[/math] Electronpaddlenumberfornegativepionpaddlenumber27.gif X b vs electronpaddlenumberfornegativepionpaddlenumber27.gif X b vs electronpaddlenumberfornegativepionpaddlenumber27lowX b.gif X b vs electronpaddlenumberfornegativepionpaddlenumber27highX b.gif

Positive Torus

Using runs with NH3 target

Detected particles in the final state X_b vs pion paddle number Chosen pion paddle number
[math]e^-[/math] && [math]\pi^+[/math] X b vs positivepionpaddlenumberNH3positivetorus.gif 27
[math]e^-[/math] && [math]\pi^-[/math] X b vs negativepionpaddlenumberNH3positivetorus.gif 7


Detected particles in the final state and chosen pion paddle number [math]e^-[/math] paddle number [math]X_b[/math] vs [math]e^-[/math] paddle number [math]X_b[/math] vs [math]e^-[/math] paddle number when [math]x_b\lt 0.3[/math] [math]X_b[/math] vs [math]e^-[/math] paddle number when [math]x_b\gt 0.3[/math]
[math]e^-[/math] && [math]\pi^+[/math], [math]PaddleNumber_{\pi^+}=27[/math] Electronpaddlenumberforpositivepionpaddlenumber7positivetorus.gif X b vs electronpaddlenumberforpositivepionpaddlenumber27positivetorus.gif X b vs electronpaddlenumberforpositivepionpaddlenumber27lowX bpositivetorus.gif X b vs electronpaddlenumberforpositivepionpaddlenumber27highX bpositivetorus.gif
[math]e^-[/math] && [math]\pi^-[/math], [math]PaddleNumber_{\pi^-}=7[/math] Electronpaddlenumberfornegativepionpaddlenumber27positivetorus.gif X b vs electronpaddlenumberfornegativepionpaddlenumber7positivetorus.gif X b vs electronpaddlenumberfornegativepionpaddlenumber7lowX bpositivetorus.gif X b vs electronpaddlenumberfornegativepionpaddlenumber7highX bpositivetorus.gif

1/15/2010

1.) How different are the kinematics when Pion in paddle 27 and electron in paddle 11 for the two different B-field

2.) Rate differences when B>0 && \pi+ in paddle 27 && e- in paddle 8 to B<0 && \pi- in paddle 27 && e- in paddle 11

3.) Do similar analysis for pi+ && B< 0

4.) Now we need to look at W. Selected SIDIS event for Xb > 0.3. plot W -vs- electron paddle number when pions are in paddle 27 and 7.


root file reaction [math]Q^2[/math] W vs [math]Q^2[/math] [math]F_{cup}[/math] [math]X_b[/math] [math]X_b\gt 0.3[/math]
1 B<0, pi^-=27 && e^-=11 Qsqrd 1.gif WvsQsqrd 1.gif Fcup 1.gif Xb 1.gif Xb 11.gif
2 B>0, pi^+=27 && e^-=11 Qsqrd 2.gif WvsQsqrd 2.gif Fcup 2.gif Xb 2.gif Xb 21.gif
3 B>0, pi^+=27 && e^-=7 Qsqrd 3.gif WvsQsqrd 3.gif Fcup 3.gif Xb 3.gif Xb 31.gif
4 B>0, pi^-=7 && e^-=11 Qsqrd 4.gif WvsQsqrd 4.gif Fcup 4.gif Xb 4.gif Xb 41.gif
5 B<0, pi^+=7 && e-=11 Qsqrd 5.gif WvsQsqrd 5.gif Fcup 5.gif Xb 5.gif Xb 51.gif



Rate differences

[math]Ratio_1 = \frac{1}{2} = 24[/math]

[math]Ratio_2 = \frac{5}{4} = 19[/math]


or

[math]Ratio_3 = \frac{1}{5} = 1.2[/math]

[math]Ratio_4 = \frac{4}{2} = 1.03[/math]


Delta_D_over_D

Retrieved from "https://wiki.iac.isu.edu/index.php?title=DeltaDoverD_Progress&oldid=34820"