<div dir="ltr">Hi Oscar,<div><br></div><div>I modified this eq as you suggested to show the explicit dependence on Q and e.</div><div><br></div><div>-Karl</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>
<img src="cid:ii_13e72db85ecaa05d" alt="Inline image 3"><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div><div><div>---<br><div>Karl J. Slifer<div>Assistant Professor</div><div>University of New Hampshire<br>
<div>Telephone : <a>603-722-0695</a></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 9:38 PM, Oscar Rondon-Aramayo <<a href="mailto:or@cms.mail.virginia.edu">or@cms.mail.virginia.edu</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote">
Hi,<br>
<br>
To further remove any confusion about our method and its errors, I suggest<br>
that instead of writing eq. (19) in terms of charge normalized, efficiency<br>
corrected counts, we display the charges and efficiencies explicitly, and<br>
use raw counts. Although we stated the kind of counts we are using in that<br>
eq. just above it, it seems Steve missed it.<br>
<br>
Per eqs. (32) and (33) in the appendix 2.2.3, this means just moving Q's and<br>
epsilons to the l.h.sides, since N1 and N are indeed raw counts there, and<br>
don't make any approximations, like Q1 ~ Q, etc.<br>
<br>
Then, the l.h.s. of eq. (34) would be<br>
<br>
(Q/Q1)*(e/e1)*(N1/N) and<br>
<br>
eq. (19) becomes<br>
<br>
Azz = 2/(f*Pzz)*[(Q/Q1)*(e/e1)*(N1/N) - 1]<br>
<br>
where it's evident that Q's and e's are normalizations or scale factors,<br>
just like f and Pzz, and change the text above the equation to say raw<br>
counts, not normalized and corrected ones.<br>
<br>
I don't see any other way to make it any clearer.<br>
<br>
And, of course, we need to emphasize somewhere that the statistical error is<br>
always based on the RAW counts.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
Oscar<br>
<div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<br>
On Fri, 3 May 2013 17:43:55 -0400<br>
Karl Slifer <<a href="mailto:karl.slifer@unh.edu">karl.slifer@unh.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
> Hi all,<br>
><br>
> I got a ton of comments, and I think I've implemented them all. I think<br>
> the most substantial pertain to the following: (equation numbers refer to<br>
> the attached draft)<br>
><br>
> Eq 17 and 19: Azz expressed as ratio - 1 as suggested by Oscar<br>
><br>
> Eq 22 : Total time expressed in terms of R_T as noted by Patricia and<br>
> concurred by Ellie and Oscar.<br>
><br>
> Page 23 Charge determination systematic : modified to reflect Oscar and<br>
> JP's suggestions<br>
><br>
> There were a lot more, so please double check that your suggestions have<br>
> been satisfactorily included.<br>
><br>
> The overhead and target sections are still in progress. Anyone have time<br>
> to help with that?<br>
><br>
> thanks,<br>
><br>
> Karl<br>
><br>
><br>
> ---<br>
> Karl J. Slifer<br>
> Assistant Professor<br>
> University of New Hampshire<br>
> Telephone : <a href="tel:603-722-0695">603-722-0695</a><br>
<br>
</div></div>_______________________________________________<br>
b1_ana mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:b1_ana@jlab.org">b1_ana@jlab.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/b1_ana">https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/b1_ana</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>