[Eic-core-phys] [EXTERNAL] BeAGLE files available. Re: simulation goals and beam energies

[mdbaker at mdbpads.com]

Pawel,

I wanted to point you to my filtered files for full energy
incoherent diffractive eA. They are root files suitable
for input to Kolja's HEPMC converter.

At jlab:
/eic/work/users/mdbaker/DiffractiveSamples

6 directories:
eAu_18x110_tau10_B1.1_Jpsi     ePb_18x108.41_tau10_B1.1_Phi
eAu_18x110_tau10_B1.1_Phi      eZr_18x122.22_tau10_B1.1_Jpsi
ePb_18x108.41_tau10_B1.1_Jpsi  eZr_18x122.22_tau10_B1.1_Phi

The Jpsi events are separated into *Je.root and *Jmu.root
depending on the decay mode. Hadronic decay modes are not
included.

I will soon add some eAu rho files as well - as Athena is
pushing the question of rho->pipi with the pions misidentified
(or assumed) as kaons being a possible phi->KK background.
This is more interesting for the coherent events (sartre), but
it is unclear at the moment if the sartre shape of the rho or
the BeAGLE (Pythia) shape of the rho (in invariant mass) is
better.

Note: phi & rho events don't really have the right nuclear
breakup behavior - the multiple nucleon interaction probability
is set for J/psi.

The files are at BNL also, let me know if you need to know where
that is.

Mark


On 2021-09-24 10:00, Pawel Nadel-Turonski wrote:
> Sorry, there was a typo. :)
> I of course meant to say that maximum energy is most important for
> gluon saturation and delta G!
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Pawel
> 
>> On Sep 24, 2021, at 9:46 AM, Pawel Nadel-Turonski
>> <turonski at jlab.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello Everyone,
>> 
>> It looks like the simulations are now making quick progress!
>> 
>> In this email I just wanted to follow up on the brief discussion we
>> had on proton beam energies at the last meeting, and the overall
>> simulations goals as outlined in the call for proposals.
>> 
>> Starting with the latter, the call
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.bnl.gov_eic_CFC.php&d=DwIDaQ&c=CJqEzB1piLOyyvZjb8YUQw&r=j2nVWPYkVu_g_8UgmNTpIOwdxsfZ27gFzo9MkyDLevk&m=iTAJ-36qhAQfoxLfFgwm7Ccum_FapC7bSaelDXCg_J8&s=VKwFjTmAk_PQz3fowvr4WY1dTs-tvWSZhG1cjO3C63g&e= 
>> states that
>> 
>> "A description of the science addressed and performance estimated
>> through simulation including, but not limited to, e/γ, jets, π/K/p
>> separation, vertex, and tracking, and how the simulated performance
>> compares to the requirements detailed in the YR.”
>> The tracking and vertex requirements will be addressed through F4A
>> simulations. Electron and photon detection are a key capability of
>> CORE, and we would want to highlight this in the simulations
>> (electron purity, DVCS on nuclei, etc). We would also need to
>> highlight the hadron ID. Of course, we should also show other
>> relevant simulations, but addressing the text in the call for
>> proposals is probably a good strategy!
>> 
>> Which leads me to the proton energies. During the meeting I
>> suggested the following:
>> 18x275: max energy, low luminosity
>> 10x275: max luminosity
>> 5x275: max luminosity, best PID
>> 5x100 medium luminosity
>> 5x41: low luminosity, beam qualify may be questionable for
>> exclusive measurements
>> 
>> The maximum luminosity setting is important for gluon saturation
>> (with heavy ions), delta G, and some jet physics, but while we may
>> want to simulate it in some context, it is probably not the setting
>> we want to use for most simulations.
>> 
>> The 10x275 and 5x275 settings give the highest luminosity - but the
>> 5x275 one has a more favorable distribution in terms of hadron
>> momenta - with high momenta in the hadron endcap (where we have a
>> dual-radiator RICH capable of doing pi/K separation up to 50 GeV)
>> and lower momenta in the electron endcap. From this point of view,
>> unless the higher energy would be important, the 5x275 setting may
>> be a better baseline.
>> 
>> The 5x100 setting has about a factor 3 lower luminosity than the
>> 5x275 one. The main advantage is that it allows reaching the same
>> point in the x-Q2 plane at a higher value of y when compared with
>> 5x275 (since Q2 = s y x).
>> 
>> The 5x41 setting is like the previous one, only with even lower
>> luminosity and access to even higher y for a given x and Q2.
>> 
>> Other settings are also possible if you would find the need for a
>> different configuration, but these are probably a good start.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> Pawel
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> EIC-CORE-phys mailing list
>> EIC-CORE-phys at jlab.org
>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/eic-core-phys
> _______________________________________________
> EIC-CORE-phys mailing list
> EIC-CORE-phys at jlab.org
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/eic-core-phys