[clas_members] [EXTERNAL] Re: Meeting this Friday, 21 Apr. at 1:30 pm

[Neupane, Krishna]

Dear Gagik,
I apologize for the misunderstanding. However, as  I mentioned to you before, my focus in that presentation is on different aspects. I had presented background subtracted versions as well right after that slide in the same presentation but my focus there was to compare exclusive events to missing channel events. It was because I had presented a comparison of pass1 to pass2 background subtracted versions a few weeks before that presentation and I was trying to do something new by comparing exclusive to missing topology to see if I can get any feeling on particle detector efficiency. I often presented background subtracted versions but on that slide, I was trying to show an overall increase in statistics (thought that is also good info to know). I already emailed you after that presentation and said that those graphs are with background and attached the background subtracted versions as well. If you have not received that email, please let me know. Here are the attached pictures of that email.

[cid:49cdfae0-c2c8-45b1-a083-d30358db47dd]
Best regards,
Krishna
________________________________
From: Gagik Gavalian <gavalian at jlab.org>
Sent: Saturday, April 22, 2023 9:16 AM
To: Neupane, Krishna <KNEUPANE at email.sc.edu>
Cc: hallb at jlab.org <hallb at jlab.org>; clas_members at jlab.org <clas_members at jlab.org>; Patrick Achenbach <patricka at jlab.org>
Subject: Re: [clas_members] [EXTERNAL] Re: Meeting this Friday, 21 Apr. at 1:30 pm

Hi Krishna,

Thank you for clearing things up, your 59% increase in statistics is closer to what I get.
As far as integrating the distributions, I think this number should never be shown, because
It is very misleading. I do not even know what it measures.

Gagik


On Apr 21, 2023, at 6:08 PM, Neupane, Krishna via clas_members <clas_members at jlab.org> wrote:


Dear Gagik and all,

Thanks  for the informative presentation. I was hoping to clarify one point regarding one of the slide presented, which highlighted a 23% increase in statistics from pass1 to pass2_v14_newCVT with RGA data.  This information was based on my previous presentation at the CLAS12 First Experiment meeting a couple of months ago. It is important to note that the 23% increase refers to the overall (signal + background) sum from 0.4 GeV2 < MMSQ_mProt < 1.4 GeV2, which is the entire range of the plot. Other two graphs there were for pass2_v1_12_02 and pass2_v1_22 versions, which had increase of about 32%. However, we do have a background-subtracted version of those graph, which shows a more significant increase (~double of with background version), please give a look at accached picture.
I also  presented new results at the recent First Experiment meeting, which covered the recent pass2 versions (v1_24, v1_25, v1_30 (8.7.0)). I have attached these results to this email if you are interested.
Thank you all for your time and attention.
Best regards,
Krishna
<image.png>

<image.png>
<pass1_vs_pass2_feb_2023_April.pdf>_______________________________________________
clas_members mailing list
clas_members at jlab.org<mailto:clas_members at jlab.org>
https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/clas_members

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/clas_members/attachments/20230422/74dc45c0/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 206650 bytes
Desc: image.png
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/clas_members/attachments/20230422/74dc45c0/attachment-0001.png>