<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body dir="auto">
Gsim
<div>$100<br>
<br>
<div id="AppleMailSignature" dir="ltr">
<div style="direction: inherit;"><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">BR<br>
MK <br>
----------------------------------------<br>
Michael C. Kunkel, USMC, PhD<br>
</span></div>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
On Jan 16, 2019, at 10:57, John W. Price <<a href="mailto:jprice@csudh.edu">jprice@csudh.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">So... let’s take bets: gsim or a1c?
<div><br>
</div>
<div>John<br>
<br>
<div id="AppleMailSignature" dir="ltr">--
<div>John W. Price</div>
<div>Professor, CSUDH Department of Physics</div>
<div>Coordinator, Science, Mathematics, and Technology Program</div>
<div>310-243-3403</div>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
On Jan 16, 2019, at 07:18, Andrea Celentano <<a href="mailto:andrea.celentano@ge.infn.it">andrea.celentano@ge.infn.it</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">All,
<div class="">after a test without including gpp (gsim output directly to a1c), I see the same issue in MC for photon energies.</div>
<div class="">I am following exactly instructions on g12 note concerning the simulation / gpp / a1c commands, using calib_user.RunIndexg12_mk and run number 10. In the past, I also used standard g12 runindex, and I got same issue for MC.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Andrea<br class="">
<div><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Jan 16, 2019, at 14:24, John W. Price <<a href="mailto:jprice@csudh.edu" class="">jprice@csudh.edu</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<div dir="auto" class="">Hi Andrea:
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Can you do a test *without* including gpp? This might help isolate the cause of the issue.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">John<br class="">
<br class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">--
<div class="">John W. Price</div>
<div class="">Professor, CSUDH Department of Physics</div>
<div class="">Coordinator, Science, Mathematics, and Technology Program</div>
<div class="">310-243-3403</div>
</div>
<div dir="ltr" class=""><br class="">
On Jan 16, 2019, at 05:15, Michael Kunkel <<a href="mailto:mkunkel@jlab.org" class="">mkunkel@jlab.org</a>> wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">Greetings Andrea,
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">I believe you just verified what Diane Schott and I had been trying to convince other of for many years. :)</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">However, the correction for simulation is quite trivial since we already know the generated 4vector. </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">I don’t believe the kinfit package handles this problem.<br class="">
<br class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div style="direction: inherit;" class=""><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);" class="">BR<br class="">
MK <br class="">
----------------------------------------<br class="">
Michael C. Kunkel, USMC, PhD<br class="">
</span></div>
</div>
<div dir="ltr" class=""><br class="">
On Jan 16, 2019, at 05:59, Andrea Celentano <<a href="mailto:andrea.celentano@ge.infn.it" class="">andrea.celentano@ge.infn.it</a>> wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div dir="ltr" class=""><span class="">Hi MK,</span><br class="">
<span class="">last meeting before holidays I presented the corrections necessary for photons, for both MC and data. For MC, the reconstructed photon energy is affected by a major shift with respect to the generated one - much larger than what happens for real
data. I remember you pointed out that this may be due to a non correct parametrization of the EC sampling fraction in the MC chain (gsim + gpp + a1c). For data, this effect is not present, since the difference between the measured photon energy and the “real”
one (as obtained from the kin. fit of gamma p -> p pi0 -> p e+ e- (gamma)) is much smaller.</span><br class="">
<span class="">Therefore, I suspect this effect is related to an error in gsim or gpp rather than a1c, or that different reconstruction routines are used in a1c for data and MC.</span><br class="">
<span class=""></span><br class="">
<span class="">Can you comment more on this?</span><br class="">
<span class=""></span><br class="">
<span class="">Thanks</span><br class="">
<span class="">Bests,</span><br class="">
<span class="">Andrea</span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div dir="ltr" class=""><span class="">_______________________________________________</span><br class="">
<span class="">G12 mailing list</span><br class="">
<span class=""><a href="mailto:G12@jlab.org" class="">G12@jlab.org</a></span><br class="">
<span class=""><a href="https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/g12" class="">https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/g12</a></span><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</body>
</html>