# 3/20/09

1.) plot Wdiff

2.) plot PE using Osipenko/Josh cuts

# 06/6/09

## Invariant Mass

Difference of Invariant Mass for two differnet cuts:

On x-axis of FC difference between the "+" heliciy FC  and the "-" helicity FC.


## 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

## 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

OSICut+NPHE>2.5

### 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

With NPHE>2.5 Cut

=

# 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

End of Run sum

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

## Pion Contamination

It appears that pion contamination in electron sample is 9.63 % 0.01 % before nphe cut and after nphe>2.5 cut contamination is about 4.029% 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.

Number of Events after cuts
 No Cuts OSI Cuts OSI+NPHE>2.5 Cuts 68.5 % 57.5 %

Error Calculation

Tthe error in the asymmetry measurement would be

 X_b X_b Asymmetry Error 0.1 0.00087251693 0.2 0.0008507530911145 0.3 1.0691459e-03 0.4 0.0014004231 0.5 0.0018665742 0.6 0.0016477095 0.7 0.0022190018 0.8 0.00291609 0.9 0.003592967 1 0.0040928449

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


### Electron theta angle and cuts

electron theta angle for different X_b

X_b when

Number of Events for X_b>0.8

plot the vertex of the above hits with X>0.8

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


# 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.

## FC Asymmetry

FC Asymmetry plot using the following method : End of Run sum ## 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 % 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)

# 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. : &&

## 3.)

 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
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
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
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

• 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


# 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 % 0.01 % 3 S. D. 9.645 % 0.025 % 10 S. D. 9.446 % 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


### with cut

root alldatasector27113_5.root

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


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


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

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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


 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.

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

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

• 1.) 7< Sector_paddle <11 - (B>0, ) - 15.3% && (B<0, ) - 10.9%
• 2.) 25< Sector_paddle <29 - (B>0, ) - 7.775% && (B<0, ) - 10.97%

## &&

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

 Detected particles in the final state Pion Paddle Number X_b vs pion paddle number Chosen pion paddle number &&  7 &&  27
 Detected particles in the final state X_b vs pion paddle number Chosen pion paddle number && 27 && 7