[Color_transp] [EXTERNAL] Re: New kinematics

[Sebouh Paul]

Hi Carlos,
If I remember correctly, Holly said that having -0.48 on the last point was
not necessary, so I put it to -0.4.  Holly, can you confirm?  Also, the
minimum allowed theta for the pion (which should be parallel to the virtual
photon) is 7.5 degrees, so I analytically determined the values of the
electron kinematics that would make the virtual photon be 7.5 degrees and
used that for the last point.

I calculated the new runtimes based on an interpolation between points in
the previous version of the table, assuming that the amount of time needed
to obtain a given amount of data scaled as e^(const*Q^2), and that the
precision scales as 1/time^2 for a given Q^2.  I then rounded some of these
values to multiples of 0.5 hours, but I can change that back to the
un-rounded values. I used the values obtained before adding additional time
in each case.

Best regards,
Sebouh

On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 5:52 PM Carlos Ayerbe Gayoso via Color_transp <
color_transp at jlab.org> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I was scaling my table
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_spreadsheets_d_1R3pbuDNsrS3M-2DSAq8H1cNxVUEVzxr4vKOxGhfE1ATqA_edit-3Fusp-3Dsharing&d=DwIFaQ&c=CJqEzB1piLOyyvZjb8YUQw&r=XtVl8BY42jbbWh0Vu1ygqgFBYEJMENirtKAh3P_9ayw&m=658ZEEoo1eRdTBz9_rxWxlVUfVAlyG52JpQDuE0jbeXXWJjj7ylSV2swm-ZYY64W&s=0JbhiaiuPfAm0qTQUh2o9fmdRIFMHTDqqC1P0Qh1KJs&e=  very
> rough, to the new Q2 points. I saw in  the run plan, that was already
> updated, and I would guess, more accurate than just linear interpolation,
> when the dependence is not linear (I just plotted them to observe the
> shape).
>
> I also updated the kinematic table in the run plan, and comparing with
> Sebouh's, both scripts behave similar, except for 8.5 which it differs,
> unless, t=-0.48 (in my case). It is just an anecdote, I trust in Sebouh's
> script better than mine.
>
> The only question I have about the new table is if the uncertainty is
> based in the new run times, original or with the extras. When I was
> calculating the numbers, in order to achieve the uncertainty in the
> proposal, should be considered only the original time, and not the extras
> (like 2 and not 2x3 for 1H or 2.5 and not 2.5+6 for 12C).
>
> Then is the 20% extra suggested by Dipangkar... I forgot, but that 20% is
> extra data taking to compensate multi-pions isn't it? How affects the total
> run numbers? (time, events)
>
> Cheers
> -Carlos
>
> *Last name: *Ayerbe *OR *Ayerbe Gayoso
>
> -------------------------------------------------
> If you receive this e-mail after hours, during a weekend, or on a holiday,
> please enjoy your time off and respond during your working hours.
> _______________________________________________
> Color_transp mailing list
> Color_transp at jlab.org
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/color_transp 
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/color_transp/attachments/20251111/e84bf9c6/attachment-0001.htm>