[Clascomment] OPT-IN:Single and double spin asymmetries for deeply virtual Compton scattering measured with CLAS and a longitudinally polarized proton target

[Silvia Niccolai]

Hi FX,
That could be another option. However, wouldn't that "X" give the impression that exclusivity cuts weren't yet applied at that stage (while actually they are)?
Silvia

Sent from my iPhone

> On 14 Jan 2015, at 17:18, Francois-Xavier Girod <fxgirod at jlab.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> Dear Silvia,
> 
> In the past, we used N_{epgX} for the unsubtracted number of "single" photon events (including pi0 contamination) and simply N_{epg} for the estimated true number of exclusive single photon events.
> 
> Best regards,
> FX
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "pisanos" <pisanos at jlab.org>
> To: "burkert" <burkert at jlab.org>
> Cc: "GUIDAL Michel" <guidal at ipno.in2p3.fr>, "Daria Sokhan" <daria at jlab.org>, "Angela Biselli" <biselli at jlab.org>, "Silvia Niccolai" <silvia at jlab.org>, voutier at jlab.org, clascomment at jlab.org, "Paul Stoler" <stolep at rpi.edu>, "Erin Seder" <eseder at jlab.org>, mirazita at lnf.infn.it
> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 11:11:40 AM
> Subject: Re: [Clascomment] OPT-IN:Single and double spin asymmetries for deeply virtual Compton scattering measured with CLAS and a longitudinally polarized proton target
> 
> Dear Volker, 
> 
> I see your point. What if we use N^{DVCS/BH} instead? 
> 
> silvia 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Clascomment mailing list
> Clascomment at jlab.org
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/clascomment