[Clas12_first_exp] CLAS12 First Experiment 03/13/19
burkert
burkert at jlab.org
Mon Mar 18 17:47:26 EDT 2019
Francois,
I think that is not quite correct. The number of event is relevant for
the physics, where the two configurations overlap, say in Q^2. If you
define a "fiducial volume" in Q^2 where the acceptance for inbending and
outbending electrons is about the same, that is where one should compare
the number of events relevant for this particular physics. The FC charge
ratio should be the same as the ratio of events in these fiducial
volumes. For a ratio of 75% to 25% in FC we should find approximately
the same ratio in the rates for the two configurations.
The difference to counting simple the total event rates is that we do
know we count a lot more low Q^2 events in the outbending configuration
compared to the inbending configuration because the acceptances are
different. We have nearly no acceptance for inbending electrons Q^2 <
1GeV^2, but a high electron rate for outbending.
To make it simple I suggest you compare just the number of events for
Q^2 > 1GeV^2, where the acceptances are about the same.
Of course, if you want to emphasize one physics topic over the other,
e.g. low Q^2 production over high Q^2 production, that is a completely
different issue.
Volker
On 3/18/19 5:24 PM, Francois-Xavier Girod wrote:
> Dear Andrey, all
>
> With the 10.6 GeV charges you show, I am getting 32% outbending and
> 68% inbending
>
> This is a bit different from what I obtained counting the raw number
> of events (triggers)
>
> I think the livetime was not very different but the trigger rate was
> 3932 spring outbending 17 kHz
> 4013 spring inbending 14 kHz
> 5036 fall inbending 13 kHz
> 5664 fall outbending 20 kHz
>
> If I try to correct for this effect I get:
> inbending:
> (0.14*85.27 + 0.13*47.78) / (0.17*24.367 + 0.14*85.27 + 0.13*47.78 +
> 0.2*39.045) = 60%
> outbending:
> (0.17*24.367 + 0.2*39.045) / (0.17*24.367 + 0.14*85.27 + 0.13*47.78
> + 0.2*39.045) = 40%
>
> These numbers reproduce quite closely what I obtained by counting the
> number of events in all the files from the pass0 selection
> I am not sure which way to count is more correct. I said before that
> the outbending is more favorable both for DVCS and the exclusive phi
> so maybe I should not insist on this point, but for physics purpose we
> are interested in the number of events, not really the Fcup charge
> directly.
>
> Best regards
> FX
>
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 9:44 PM Andrey Kim <kenjo at jlab.org
> <mailto:kenjo at jlab.org>> wrote:
>
> I split different energies apart:
> https://clas12mon.jlab.org/rga/stats/timeline/
> spring inbeding 6GeV: 0.819 mC
> spring outbeding 6GeV: 1.68 mC
> spring outbeding 10GeV: 24.367 mC
> spring inbeding 10GeV: 85.27 mC
> fall inbeding 10GeV: 47.78 mC
> fall outbeding 10GeV: 39.045 mC
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 2:23 PM Andrey Kim <kenjo at jlab.org
> <mailto:kenjo at jlab.org>> wrote:
>
> It's integrated over all energies. But it makes sense to
> separate them I'll do it now.
> Andrey.
>
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 11:47 AM Eugene Pasyuk
> <pasyuk at jlab.org <mailto:pasyuk at jlab.org>> wrote:
>
> Andrey,
>
> Is it for 10.6 GeV only or includes low energies as well?
>
> -Eugene
>
> *From:* Clas12_first_exp
> <clas12_first_exp-bounces at jlab.org
> <mailto:clas12_first_exp-bounces at jlab.org>> *On Behalf Of
> *Andrey Kim
> *Sent:* Monday, March 18, 2019 11:23 AM
> *To:* Latifa Elouadrhiri <latifa at jlab.org
> <mailto:latifa at jlab.org>>
> *Cc:* clas12_first_exp at jlab.org
> <mailto:clas12_first_exp at jlab.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Clas12_first_exp] CLAS12 First Experiment
> 03/13/19
>
> Following last week discussion, I have calculated
> accumulated charge for inbending and outbending data for
> RG-A using IPM2C21A:
> https://clas12mon.jlab.org/dev/rga/stats/timeline/
>
> We collected:
>
> 86.090 mC during spring inbending
>
> 26.047 mC during spring outbending
>
> 47.780 mC during fall inbeding
>
> 39.045 mC during fall outbending
>
> I used start/end times from RCDB. I remember we had some
> issues with RCDB at some point when not all runs were
> stored there. Did it happen during RGA data taking or RGK?
>
> Best,
>
> Andrey.
>
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 6:26 AM Latifa Elouadrhiri
> <latifa at jlab.org <mailto:latifa at jlab.org>> wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> We will have our CLAS12 First Experiment meeting
> Wednesday March 13, 2019 at 8:30 in F224/25
>
> The agenda of the meeting includes:
>
> *RGA Spring 2019:*
>
> * Run Plan/Shifts/Run coordinator list
> * Plans for online calibration/data processing
>
> *RGA_Fall/Spring 2019*
>
> * Status of data processing/disk space organization
> * Status of Alignment and plan for next steps of
> data calibration
> * Timeline Monitoring status
> * First look at the processed data
> * Others
>
> Please let me know by this evening if you have any
> questions and if you would like to give a presentation
>
> Best regards,
>
> Latifa
>
> _______________________________________________
> Clas12_first_exp mailing list
> Clas12_first_exp at jlab.org
> <mailto:Clas12_first_exp at jlab.org>
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/clas12_first_exp
>
> _______________________________________________
> Clas12_first_exp mailing list
> Clas12_first_exp at jlab.org <mailto:Clas12_first_exp at jlab.org>
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/clas12_first_exp
>
>
> This body part will be downloaded on demand.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/clas12_first_exp/attachments/20190318/22f9e1b4/attachment.html>
More information about the Clas12_first_exp
mailing list