[clas12_rgk] [EXTERNAL] Run group addition proposal

[Harut Avagyan]

On 5/12/2023 7:20 PM, Volker Burkert wrote:
> Dear Harut,

Dear Volker,

Sorry for confusion. The leftover stuff requiring additional time will 
be removed. We are not planning to ask any additional time.

Best,

Harut

>
> Although I would support that proposal as a new CLAS12 experiment, the 
> fact that you are still discussing prominently the "The need for 
> inbending.." is a distraction and will only confuse the collaboration 
> and the PAC, should it be submitted as a RGK run group proposal 
> extension.  I am therefore unable to join the proposal.
>
> Just one comment on the energies. RGK has requested 8.8 GeV and 6.6 
> GeV. However, the machine is currently not capable of achieving those 
> energies in the 4 pass and in 3 pass operation. That's why we have to 
> settle on the somewhat lower energies.
>
> Regards,
> Volker
>
> From the PAC call for proposals.
>
> *"Additions to Previously Approved Run Groups*
>
> New experimental proposals that do not require additional experimental 
> equipment and that run (even partially) in parallel with previously 
> approved run groups should be considered internally by the proposing 
> collaboration. */Run group additions that require changes or 
> additional equipment need to be submitted as full stand-alone 
> proposals."/**
> *
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* harut avagyan <avagyan.harut at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, May 12, 2023 5:30 PM
> *To:* Daniel Carman <carman at jlab.org>; Annalisa D'Angelo 
> <annalisa.dangelo at roma2.infn.it>; Volker Burkert <burkert at jlab.org>
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Run group addition proposal
> Dear All,
> While we are still working on the part with RGK data the draft has 
> some details on MC  and the motivation. The latest version is in 
> https://userweb.jlab.org/~avakian/tmp/Run_Group_K_Proposal__LT_separation_of_the_SIDIS_pi__cross_section.pdf
> We make the case for 8.4 (better 8.8) being critical for Q^2>4 GeV 
> to qualify for run group addition.
> We will need relative cross section measurements with systematics 
> below 5%.
> We do have some estimates of expected cross sections. For better 
> understanding of opportunities with exclusive parts it will be useful 
> to have some evaluation of expected x-sections for some bins vs beam 
> energy.
>
> Please let me know if you will be interested to be part of the proposal.
> Best regards,
> Harut
>
> P.S. We may push for online reconstruction in future to be used in 
> online monitoring of tracking efficiencies in the full kinematics in 
> polar and azimuthal angles of electrons.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/clas12_rgk/attachments/20230512/19c021fd/attachment-0001.html>