[Eg6_analysis] Checking the performance of the extracted drift speed corrections

Fri Jan 17 10:36:11 EST 2014

Hello Nathan and All,
   There was a problem with the previous test cooking. The TDCmax
calculation needs the run number as input. I implemented it to be the
runNum variable, but it seems not working. Attached two plots, the
expected TDCmax vs. z from the corrections and the actual one we got
from the previous test cooking.
    My corrections include the runs from 61488 to 61960. I kept the
previous formula for the runs which are not included in this range.
This formula is: TDCmax = 53.1422 -0.0317579*z +0.00199476*z*z. This
formula is giving us the concave up distribution of TDCmax which we
got from cooking, while the corrections have to give concave down TDC
vs. z distribution.
    I have to investigate the variable runNum and make sure that it is
referring to the run Number. Then i will cook some files to check if
everything is going well and update the wikipage.

Best regards,
Mohammad.

> Hi Mohammad, Nathan and All,
>
> I have implemented several modified routines from Stepan in our software
> to
> solve the segmentation fault issue that was occasionally happening
> while reading the RF TDC time for some data-files, and also to fix the
> false return of a .not. operator whenever applied to a true logical
> expression!
> I believe these changes won't affect Mohammad's drift path study results,
> but it might affect the particle identification and a time determination
> in CLAS based on Nathan's comparison (this
> email<https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/eg6_analysis/2013-December/000357.html>),
> in which he reported some changes in a trigger time and a neutral
> particles
> id. between
> Pass1_v1 and the new OS cooked files. For a quick check, I processed 10
> files of a run 61448, which you can find in this directory:
> /volatile/clas/claseg6/tgemRHL6_v3/1p2gev/. But If you need more data for
> this comparison I can process more; either reprocess the same files
> that Mohammad used in his study for both beam energies or others based on
> your preferences.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Lamiaa
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Nathan Baltzell <baltzell at jlab.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Mohammad & EG6,
>>
>> I am noticing some strange things with this new data.  While the
>> yields in dz(CLAS-RTPC) peak are increased like your good track
>> yields, S/B ratio is smaller than it used to be (but maybe that
>> is ok).  Next, the width of the peak is larger.  So I looked at
>> dz vs theta, and that same dependence of the peak position in
>> pass1v1 is now at least 3x larger.   Also, if you look at it as
>> function of z, things are quite different:  as you move upstream,
>> dz peak gets washed out, whereas before it was pretty clear at
>> all vertices.  Do you see the same?  I don't think any of these
>> effects are coming from the electron vertex, as a quick event-by-
>> event scan shows the electron vertex is basically unchanged, and
>> the beam windows haven't moved.
>>
>> Any ideas?  I put a few of these plots on the wiki:
>> https://clasweb.jlab.org/rungroups/lowq/wiki/index.php/Gempass1v2nab
>>
>> It might be useful to see some more plots of the change in
>> reconstructed quantities for the overlap events.  Like
>> dz/dtheta/dp versus theta/z (you already showed dp vs z).
>>
>> And maybe we should go ahead and recook the rest of 1 GeV to
>> look closer at elastics once 64bit user_ana issues are resolved.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Nathan
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 16 Jan 2014 11:02:16 -0600, <hattawy at ipno.in2p3.fr> wrote:
>>
>> > Hello Nathan,
>> >    For the new region which is around 2 rad in phi, it is not totally
>> new
>> > region. If you see in the previous cooking it exists but not very
>> > clear.
>> >
>> >    About the 60% increase in the 1.2 GeV, yes the TDCmax and the drift
>> > speed they are consistent in the two method with a variation of 1%. It
>> > is not clear for me why we have this increase. It might be the fact
>> > that we compared the drift speed of the golden elastic events to the
>> > one of good tracks. If you can have a look at the two versions of
>> > cooking for 1.2 runs, you will see the distributions of sdist, edist
>> > and the other parameters getting narrower in the new cooking, while
>> > they have been wide before and large number of the tracks they were
>> not
>> > included in the initial drift speed comparison.
>> >    The new cooked files are in:
>> > /volatile/clas/claseg6/gempass1_v2/6gev/
>> > /volatile/clas/claseg6/gempass1_v2/1p2gev/
>> >
>> >    The old cooking are in:
>> > /volatile/clas/claseg6/gempass1_v1/6gev/
>> > /volatile/clas/claseg6/gempass1_v1/1p2gev/
>> >
>> > Best regards,
>> > Mohammad.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> Hi Mohammad,
>> >>
>> >> Looks like you also picked up a region of phi that didn't even exist
>> >> before (~2.2 rad)!
>> >>
>> >> Is it correct that there is 60% increase even in the 1.2 GeV runs
>> that
>> >> were being used
>> >> for the previous calibrations?  I thought old and new drift speed
>> were
>> >> consistent there?
>> >>
>> >> And can you tell me where these newly cooked 10 runs are?
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Nathan
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, 16 Jan 2014 09:57:42 -0600, Mohammad Hattawy
>> >> <mohammad.hattawy at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Dear all, As we have seen from the previous studies, the drift speed
>> is
>> >>> changing during the experiment. I have been working on correcting
>> the
>> >>> drift speed. New correcting >parameters are extracted and
>> implemented
>> >>> in
>> >>> the cooking package. Selected 10 test runs were recooked with these
>> new
>> >>> modifications.
>> >>> I did a study of the performance of these corrections. As a result,
>> we
>> >>> collect more good tracks in the RTPC. This incease is ranging from
>> 60%
>> >>> to 126%.  A detailed >study can been found here:
>> >>>
>> https://clasweb.jlab.org/rungroups/lowq/wiki/index.php/Drift_Speed_Correction:_Results
>> >>>
>> >>>  Comments and suggestions are greatly appreciated.
>> >>>
>> >>> --Best regards,
>> >>> Mohammad Hattawy._______________________________________________
>> >> Eg6_analysis mailing list
>> >> Eg6_analysis at jlab.org
>> >> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/eg6_analysis
>> >>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Eg6_analysis mailing list
>> Eg6_analysis at jlab.org
>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/eg6_analysis
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Eg6_analysis mailing list
> Eg6_analysis at jlab.org
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/eg6_analysis
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: TDC_Z.png
Type: image/png
Size: 22214 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/eg6_analysis/attachments/20140117/5d6c1066/attachment-0002.png 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: expected_TDC_Z.png
Type: image/png
Size: 8739 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/eg6_analysis/attachments/20140117/5d6c1066/attachment-0003.png 