[b1_ana] TAC/iTAC resp.

[Long, Elena]

My apologizes, the Pzz_40_* files have Rel. Sys=6%.

Take care,
Ellie

Elena Long, Ph.D.
Post Doctoral Research Associate
University of New Hampshire
elena.long at unh.edu
ellie at jlab.org
(603) 862-1962
http://nuclear.unh.edu/~elong

On Wed 05 Jun 2013 04:11:34 PM EDT, Elena Long wrote:
> Good afternoon,
>
> I've attached *.eps plots using the drift uncertainties listed in
> Table 1 of the ITAC response. They are included as a weighted average
> to each x bin, where the bins have been collected across multiple
> spectrometer settings. Pzz_20_* files are with Pzz=0.2 and Rel.
> Sys=12%, Pzz_40_* files are with Pzz=0.4 and Rel. Sys=9%. *_bars_*
> show the uncertainties on the points and *_bands_* splits the
> systematics into a band underneath the estimates.
>
> Take care,
> Ellie
>
> On Wed 05 Jun 2013 02:31:44 PM EDT, Dustin Keller wrote:
>>
>> Yes I'm ok with using as much or as little as we all decide
>> I guess we can determine what to keep next meeting.
>>
>> dustin
>>
>> On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, O. A. Rondon wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi Dustin,
>>>
>>> Minor comment: collaboration spelling.
>>>
>>> One comment Don made is that a 7-8 pages response to a two pages report
>>> seems a bit too long. I tend to agree that we should do some
>>> condensing.
>>>
>>> Also I think the bulk of section 3 would be better separated as an
>>> addendum. I think at the response level we should concentrate on
>>> justifying 20% Pzz. I believe Karl said that Chris was comfortable
>>> with it.
>>>
>>> One way to attain the desired level would be to use a 6.5 T coil
>>> (simple
>>> solenoid is cheapest, and it would work fine with longitudinal
>>> field). I
>>> do think we should mention that a new target should be seriously
>>> considered, since the CLAS coils were just a stopgap solution for an
>>> experiment that needed both para and perp field.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Oscar
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dustin Keller wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Edits have been made to the TAC/iTAC resp. with the
>>>> updated version at
>>>> https://userweb.jlab.org/~dustin/work/b1_dir/Azz_response/
>>>>
>>>> additional edits and suggestions are welcome.
>>>>
>>>> dustin
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 3 Jun 2013, Dustin Keller wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The working rough draft of the TAC/iTAC response is at
>>>>> https://userweb.jlab.org/~dustin/work/b1_dir/Azz_response/
>>>>>
>>>>> we may need considerable altering, editing, and condensing
>>>>> but all the information is there.
>>>>>
>>>>> dustin
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> b1_ana mailing list
>>>>> b1_ana at jlab.org
>>>>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/b1_ana
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> b1_ana mailing list
>>>> b1_ana at jlab.org
>>>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/b1_ana
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> b1_ana mailing list
>>> b1_ana at jlab.org
>>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/b1_ana
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> b1_ana mailing list
>> b1_ana at jlab.org
>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/b1_ana
>> --
>> Elena Long, Ph.D.
>> Post Doctoral Research Associate
>> University of New Hampshire
>> elena.long at unh.edu
>> ellie at jlab.org
>> (603) 862-1962
>> http://nuclear.unh.edu/~elong