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

Nathan Baltzell baltzell at anl.gov
Thu Jan 23 13:42:01 EST 2014 

Mohammad,

I checked the 1.269 GeV data, and I see a ~40% increase in
elastics, similar enough to your 60%.  Where I get zero
difference in elastic yield compared to pass1v1 is in 1.206.


On your 2nd question, we saw a concerning theta-dependence
of dz(RTPC-CLAS) previously (Fig. 1, bottom left, for example):

https://userweb.jlab.org/~baltzell/EG6/RTPC/tpcerror.pdf

It looks like your Fig. 5 is going to increase it some,
but I don't know it means.

One observation from your elastic plots is that the change in
p and theta due to the new drift speed is highly correlated.
We expect z and theta must be correlated, and I showed
previously that p and phi are too.  Just an observation ...

Regards,
Nathan


On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 06:36:46 -0600, <hattawy at ipno.in2p3.fr> wrote:

> Hell Nathan,
>   I have updated the wiki page
> (https://clasweb.jlab.org/rungroups/lowq/wiki/index.php/Drift_Speed_Correction:_Results)
> with the detailed comparisons for the three data packages (1.2, 6 and
> 1.27 GeV). In each section you can find a link to more detailed graphs.
>    I am wondering about the 1.27 GeV data, i got 60% more elastic events.
> Do you apply the same selection cuts i used?.
>    Also, in 6 and 1.27 GeV data we got a dependence between the change in
> the constructed vertex in RTPC and the polar angle. What do you think
> about this.
>
> Best regards,
> Mohammad.
>
>
>> Hi Mohammad,
>>
>> Looks like the effects on momentum and theta are not too large
>> for the elastics you show (~1% and 0.1deg).  But it would be most
>> interesting to see how much change in reconstructed quantities
>> there is for the 6 GeV runs where the difference in the drift
>> speed compared to pass1v1 is much larger.  Maybe we need some
>> more 6 GeV files for that.
>>
>> For the 1.206 GeV data, I actually see almost no change in
>> the number of good elastic tracks in the RTPC, but I get 30%
>> more good tracks in the dz(CLAS-RTPC) peak for 6 GeV.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Nathan
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 09:42:12 -0600, <hattawy at ipno.in2p3.fr> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello All,
>>>   I updated the wiki page (
>>> https://clasweb.jlab.org/rungroups/lowq/wiki/index.php/Drift_Speed_Correction:_Results)
>>> with the new plots related to checking the performance of the drift
>>> speed corrections.
>>>   For the 1.2 GeV data at the beginning, The two cooking versions are
>>> consistent at the level of selecting good tracks. While, the newly
>>> cooked data have collected 15 % more elastic events. For the 6 GeV  
>>> data,
>>> the same increase percentage has been achieved in collecting good
>>> tracks.
>>>
>>>   Suggestions are greatly appreciated.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Mohammad.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi Mohammad, Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> After the modification that Mohammad did to initialize the run  
>>>> number's
>>>> variable properly before the new implemented drift path calculation is
>>>> done, I have processed
>>>> some runs of 1.2 GeV and 6 GeV data-set. The new 1.2 GeV cooked data
>>>> are
>>>> located in this directory: /volatile/clas/claseg6/gempass1_v3/1p2gev/.
>>>> However, the
>>>> processed 6 GeV data-files, which their cooking is not done yet, will
>>>> go
>>>> eventually to this directory:  
>>>> /volatile/clas/claseg6/gempass1_v3/6gev/.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Lamiaa
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 10:36 AM, <hattawy at ipno.in2p3.fr> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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

More information about the Eg6_analysis mailing list