Difference between revisions of "Analysis"

From New IAC Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
Line 1: Line 1:
−
[http://www.jlab.org/~shifeng EG1 run database ]<br>
+
[[Particle Identification]]<br>
−
[http://www.jlab.org/~claseg1/eg1summ.html run summary]<br>
+
[[Quality Checks]]<br>
−
[http://www.jlab.org/Hall-B/secure/eg1/EG2000/fersch/QUALITY_CHECKS/file_quality/runinfo.txt polarization info]<br>
 
  
−
=Particle Identification=
+
[[EG1_Teleconferences_DeltaDoverD]]
−
==Electron==
 
  
−
=== Cuts ===
+
[[http://wiki.iac.isu.edu/index.php/Delta_D_over_D Back to Delta_D_over_D]]
  
−
==== 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.
 
  
 +
[[ phi angle in CM frame for different runs]]<br>
  
−
 
+
[[some things]]
−
=====<math>EC_{tot}>0.2*p</math>=====
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
Without any cuts we have 181018 entries. After using the following cut <math>EC_{tot}>0.2*p</math> we are getting 127719 entries, which is about 70.55% of 181018. <br>
 
−
 
 
−
[[Image:Etotal_P_using_tot_cut.gif | 200 px]]  
 
−
[[Image:Einner_P_using_tot_cut.gif | 200 px]]<br>
 
−
 
 
−
=====<math>EC_{inner}>0.08*p</math>=====
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
After the cut on the energy deposited into inner part of electron calorimeter, number of entries decreases by 22%.<br>
 
−
 
 
−
[[Image:Etotal_P_using_inner_cut.gif | 200 px]] [[Image:Einner_P_using_inner_cut.gif | 200 px]]<br>
 
−
 
 
−
=====Both cuts <math>  EC_{tot}>0.2*p </math> and <math> EC_{inner}>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% <br>
 
−
 
 
−
[[Image:Etotal_P_using_both_cuts.gif | 200 px]]
 
−
[[Image:Einner_P_using_both_cuts.gif | 200 px]]<br>
 
−
 
 
−
====summary table====
 
−
 
 
−
The "# of triggers" columns represents the number of events which generated a signal above threshold in the calorimeter and the scintillator.  The expected # of events column represents the number of reconstructed events with tracks that also make it through the cuts defined in the table.
 
−
 
 
−
The semi-inclusive analysis will focus on the 4 GeV and 6 GeV data which have both inbending and outbending torus settings.  Specifically runs 28074 - 28579 ( 4 GeV) and Runs 27356 - 27499 and 26874 - 27198 (6 GeV)
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
{|border="2" colspan = "20"
 
−
!Beam Energy||Torus Current||Begin Run||End Run ||file used || cuts || || || # trig(<math>10^6</math>) || expected # evts(<math>10^6</math>)
 
−
|-
 
−
| || || || || || <math>EC_{tot}>0.2*p</math> || <math>EC_{inner}>0.08*p</math>|| <math>EC_{tot}>0.2*p </math> and <math> EC_{inner}>0.08*p</math>|| ||
 
−
|-
 
−
|1606||1500||25488||25559||dst25504_02.B00||64%||49.5%||78%||60||3.2
 
−
|-
 
−
|1606||1946||25560||25605|| || ||44
 
−
|-
 
−
|1606||1500||25669||25732||dst25669_02.B00||64%||49%||78%||226||10
 
−
|-
 
−
|1606||1500||25742||26221||dst25754_02.B00||21%||11%||24%||3154||13.3
 
−
|-
 
−
|1606||-1500||26222||26359||dst26224_02.B00||4.6%||3%||6.6%||703||13.1
 
−
|-
 
−
|1724||-1500||27644||27798||dst27649_02.B00||4.8%||2.2%||5.9%||211||20
 
−
|-
 
−
|1724||1500||28512||28526|| || ||159
 
−
|-
 
−
|1724||-1500||28527||28532|| || ||93
 
−
|-
 
−
|2288||1500||27205||27351||dst27225_02.B00||20.2%||13%||25.6%||1647||16.1
 
−
|-
 
−
|2562||-1500||27799||27924||dst27809_02.B00||5.7%||4.6%||8.6%||1441||13.1
 
−
|-
 
−
|2562||-1500||27942||27995||dst27942_02.B00||6.1%||4.4%||8.9%||841||32.3
 
−
|-
 
−
|2562||1500||28001||28069||dst28002_02.B00||27.8%||13%||29.6%||1013||30.7
 
−
|-
 
−
|2792||-1500||27936||27941||dst27937_02.B00||6.7%||5%||9.9%||69||20.6
 
−
|-
 
−
|3210||-2250||28549||28570|| || ||436
 
−
|-
 
−
|4239||2250||28074||28277||dst28075_02.B00||35.3%||23.9%||40.5%||2278||19.6
 
−
|-
 
−
|4239||-2250||28280||28479||dst28281_02.B00||9.1%||9.4%||13.6%||2620||15.2
 
−
|-
 
−
|4239||2250||28482||28494|| || ||7
 
−
|-
 
−
|4239||-2250||28500||28505|| || ||107
 
−
|-
 
−
|4239||2250||28506||28510||dst28509_02.B00||29.5%||22%||36%||75||18.1
 
−
|-
 
−
|5627||2250||27356||27364||dst27358_02.B00||33.2%||27.8%||41.3%||56||19.4
 
−
|-
 
−
|5627||-2250||27366||27380||dst27368_02.B00||12.6%||14.8%||19.5%||130||13.6
 
−
|-
 
−
|5627||2250||27386||27499||dst27388_02.B00||33.4%||27.8%||41.4%||1210||20.2
 
−
|-
 
−
|5627||965||27502||27617|| || ||493
 
−
|-
 
−
|5735||-2250||26874||27068||dst26904_02.B00||13%||15%||20%||1709||19.9
 
−
|-
 
−
|5735||2250||27069||27198||dst27070_02.B00||33.3%||28.8%||42.2%||1509||15
 
−
|-
 
−
|5764||-2250||26468||26722||dst26489_02.B00||12.2%||14.4%||19.1%||1189||10
 
−
|-
 
−
|5764||0||26723||26775|| || ||268
 
−
|-
 
−
|5764||-2250||26776||26851||dst26779_02.B00||13.5%||15.5%||20.5%||662||15.9
 
−
|}
 
−
 
 
−
====Cut on the number of photoelectrons====
 
−
In this case is used a cut on the number of photoelectrons, which is <math>nphe>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%
 
−
<br>
 
−
Tamuna: It looks like you didn't center the bins around integer values.  new TH1F("name","name", 35,-0.5,34.5)
 
−
 
−
[[Image:nphe1_before_cut.gif|200px]]  [[Image:nphe1_after_cut.gif|200px]]<br>
 
−
 
 
−
====Plot of <math>EC_{tot}/p</math> vs <math>EC_{inner}/p</math>====
 
−
 
 
−
In this case is used file dst25754(Energy 1.6 GeV and Torus 1500) and are applied the following EC cuts: For ECtotal - <math>EC_{tot}>0.27p - 0.071\sqrt{p}</math>, for EC inner - <math>EC_{inner}>0.08p</math>.<br>
 
−
 
 
−
=====P<3=====
 
−
 
 
−
After using above cuts the number of entries decreases ~23.2%<br>
 
−
 
 
−
Tamuna:  Make all 2-D plots contour plots ("cont0") with the "colz" option so we get a scale.  The dots don't mean much after you get a lot of them<br>  Are you using "0.6" for the font size?
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
[[Image:e_total_vs_e_inner_before_cuts_file_dst25754.gif|200px]]
 
−
[[Image:e_total_vs_e_inner_after_cuts_file_dst25754.gif|200px]]<br>
 
−
 
 
−
=====0.5<P<1=====
 
−
The number of entries decreased by ~17.7%<br>
 
−
 
 
−
[[Image:e_total_vs_e_inner_before_cuts_P1_file_dst25754.gif|200px]]
 
−
[[Image:e_total_vs_e_inner_after_cuts_P1_file_dst25754.gif|200px]]<br>
 
−
 
 
−
=====1<P<1.5=====
 
−
 
 
−
The number of entries decreased approximately by 24.3%<br>
 
−
 
−
[[Image:e_total_vs_e_inner_before_cuts_P1.5_file_dst25754.gif|200px]]
 
−
[[Image:e_total_vs_e_inner_after_cuts_P1.5_file_dst25754.gif|200px]]<br>
 
−
 
 
−
=====1.5<P<2=====
 
−
 
 
−
In this case the number of entries decreased by 43.9%<br>
 
−
 
 
−
[[Image:e_total_vs_e_inner_before_cuts_P2_file_dst25754.gif|200px]]
 
−
[[Image:e_total_vs_e_inner_after_cuts_P2_file_dst25754.gif|200px]]<br>
 
−
 
 
−
==Pion==
 
−
=Quality Checks=
 
−
==Rates==
 
−
==Asymmetries==
 

Latest revision as of 18:49, 13 January 2009

Particle Identification
Quality Checks

EG1_Teleconferences_DeltaDoverD

[Back to Delta_D_over_D]


phi angle in CM frame for different runs

some things

Retrieved from "https://wiki.iac.isu.edu/index.php?title=Analysis&oldid=20689"