[b1_ana] draft V3

Sun May 5 23:47:37 EDT 2013

Hi All,
I just noticed that my name in the front is misspelled: Liuti instead of Luiti.

Simonetta 

On Sat, 4 May 2013 20:19:19 -0400
 Karl Slifer <karl.slifer at unh.edu> wrote:
>Hi Ellie,
>
>I don't have any suggestions for further tweaks.  Combining the central two
>points would look compelling but the x bin would be quite large.  We should
>have a slide as backup for the PAC, but I think its ok to leave separate
>for now.
>
>Is it possible to post or send the .agr files?  I think I can make them
>behave and produce clean plots...
>
>-Karl
>
>
>---
>Karl J. Slifer
>Assistant Professor
>University of New Hampshire
>Telephone : 603-722-0695
>
>
>On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Elena Long <ellie at jlab.org> wrote:
>
>> Good evening,
>>
>> The *.eps files of the plots can be found here:
>> http://nuclear.unh.edu/~elong/analysis_files/2013-05-04/
>>
>> I apologize that they're not vectors. xmgrace didn't output the plots
>> quite like I expected it to, and I'm not certain that I can figure out why
>> before the deadline.
>>
>> I do once again want to point out
>> https://hallcweb.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/Elong-13-05-02#Current_Best_Numbers
>>
>> In particular, I want to make sure that everyone's ok with the x bins in
>> b1 and Azz. The two center points could be joined if we wanted, or we could
>> take some time off of the smallest x bin and give it to one of the other
>> ones. If there's any tweaking of the points that folks would like to see,
>> please let me know.
>>
>> Also for clarification, the rate and time estimates are for the
>> spectrometers at each of the blue and red blobs in the kinematics plots.
>> They don't directly correlate to the x bins for Azz and b1 since we're
>> merging data from different kinematics settings.
>>
>> Take care,
>> Ellie
>>
>>
>>
>> On May 4, 2013, at 7:36 PM, Karl Slifer <karl.slifer at unh.edu> wrote:
>>
>>
>> PPS : please note that in the overhead I assumed we would switch
>> polarization states twice per day and I assumed 2 hours each time.  I think
>> this would imply about 10 "buckets" of polarized counts and 10 "buckets" of
>> unpolarized counts for each of our 3 x-points.   It is our dominant
>> overhead at 5 days total.
>>
>> I think we may have a little room to move here.  Please see the attached
>> plot from g2p data, where we depolarized the (proton) target by pumping
>> with microwaves in less than 4 minutes.  The pump up is also very fast with
>> the new fridge and blasting the wattage of the new microwave cavity the
>> pump up is about 30 mins to the negative state.  I think polarizing in the
>> positive state is usually a little faster.
>>
>> So, perhaps we can be a little more aggressive in our overhead estimate :5
>> or 10 mins for depolarizing and 30 mins to polarize.  That would give us
>> the flexibility to increase the number of "buckets" to say 10 or 12 total
>> per day.  It will be a large overhead (about 12 days just for this), but oh
>> well.  Would this be sufficient to control the known drifts?
>>
>> A little more radical would be to explore the idea of flipping from
>> positive to negative tensor polarization rapidly with an AFP type flip,
>> which I believe is near instantaneous.  This is essentially what happens
>> with hole burning anyway I think.
>>
>> -Karl
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> Karl J. Slifer
>> Assistant Professor
>> University of New Hampshire
>> Telephone : 603-722-0695
>>
>>
>> On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Karl Slifer <karl.slifer at unh.edu> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I've posted the updated draft at
>>>
>>> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/59933793/tensor_b1_v03.pdf
>>>
>>> There is some lagtime for implementation, but I think this reflects
>>> pretty well where our discussion was about 24 hours ago.  However, we still
>>> need:
>>>
>>> -updated rates/kin plots from Ellie or Patricia and values for the table
>>>
>>> -some consensus on how to address Steve's comments.
>>>
>>> It seems we have three options with time running short.
>>>
>>> 1) List all possible factors that drift with time and atleast sketch a
>>> plan to deal with them.
>>>
>>> 2) go back to difference of counts.
>>>
>>> 3) Cancel submission and work on this for next PAC.
>>>
>>> I lean to the first, Oscar leans to the second.  I'd very much like to
>>> find some consensus on this.  Am I the only one still nerding it up in
>>> front of my computer on this beautiful spring day?
>>>
>>> -Karl
>>>
>>> PS : If anyone makes suggestions for changes I would very much appreciate
>>> that they be in a form that I can put into the document quickly.
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Karl J. Slifer
>>> Assistant Professor
>>> University of New Hampshire
>>> Telephone : 603-722-0695
>>>
>>
>> <spin_flip.png>_______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> b1_ana mailing list
>> b1_ana at jlab.org
>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/b1_ana
>>
>>

**************************************************************
**************************************************************
Prof. Simonetta Liuti                     telephone (434) 982-2087
Department of Physics               FAX       (434) 924-4576
University of Virginia              home      (434) 973 9593
382 McCormick Rd.
PO Box 400714
Charlottesville, VA 22904-4714