[Color_transp] Influence of W on Q2=8 hydrogen results

[Holly Szumila-Vance]

Dear all,

From our discussion yesterday, I re-ran 2 things.

1. Using the online cuts, I re-ran over all the files to get the good counts. They are still slightly less than pass0, but they are much closer, and I think the discrepancy is due to the inclusion of the timing cuts (basically the stuff we see from Latif’s comparison plots yesterday). That file is attached here, named: ct_beancounts_og.txt

2. I looked at the Q2=8 hydrogen data since that ratio still comes out funny. Using a cut that includes W (the values from my slides yesterday), the ratios I obtain are (+/- 1%):
1.09123 (fixed efficiencies from spreadsheet)
0.94834 (John’s improved efficiencies)

Now, if I exclude W cuts altogether, I obtain (+/- 1%):
1.1088 (fixed efficiencies from spreadsheet)
0.9636 (John’s improved efficiencies)

So I conclude that the there is a small sensitivity to W, but not enough to account for the hydrogen ratio offset. I’ll have to think a bit more about why this kinematic setting is different than the others and why the ratio comes out so low with the improved efficiencies. Perhaps there is a dead time issue or some other factor we have not considered which would be separate from the efficiency studies.

-Holly





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/color_transp/attachments/20181220/95fdccb4/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: ct_beancounts_og.txt
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/color_transp/attachments/20181220/95fdccb4/attachment.txt>