[g13] Still-Needed Analysis-Independent g13a Studies

[ctaylor at jlab.org]

A very good list, indeed. I will start studying the Tagger counter cuts,
and possible methods of studying it to determine the cuts.

-Chuck


> Here is the list of the analysis-independent studies that still need to be
> performed on the g13a data set (excluding polarization studies, which USC
> is currently working on):
>
> 1) TOF Track Reconstruction Efficiencies: Determine the efficiency of the
> TOF paddles.  This needs to be done in a phi-dependent manner (since PMTs
> on varying sides of the paddle have vastly varying strengths).  For
> coupled paddles 40-48 this needs to be done as a function of theta instead
> of scintillator # in order to decouple the paddles.  This is EXTREMELY
> important for minimum-ionizing particles at large angles (at the moment I
> have to cut all of paddles 40 - 48 in every sector from my analysis).  I
> will study this.
>
> 2) Determine the trigger efficiency as a function of theta in paddles
> 40-48 instead of paddle # (to decouple the paddles).  I will do this.
>
> 3) SC paddle cuts: come up with and apply a consistent metric for
> determining which SC paddles should be cut from cross section analyses (so
> far I just eye-balled it).  The difference between this and #1 is to cut
> any paddles with misaligned timing and/or mass peaks (will primarily be
> paddles 40-48).  This should also be used to cut paddles that are
> effectively completely dead.
>
> 4) Tagger counter cuts: Come up with and apply a consistent metric for
> determining which tagger counters (E & T) should be cut from cross section
> analyses (so far I just eye-balled it).  For this we should probably
> either use the flux-corrected track yields by counter, or use the tagging
> ratios that Chuck determined from the normalization runs.
>
> 5) Use PDU to determine the reconstruction efficiency of the DC.  Yordanka
> is getting in touch with Maurizio about this.
>
> 6) Determine the systematic uncertainty of the photon flux.  We can
> probably just do what other experiments have done for this (I can't
> remember off the top of my head).
>
> 7) Study the density of the target and the systematic uncertainty on it's
> value.  We can probably just do what other experiments have done for this
> (I can't remember off the top of my head).
>
> 8) Minimum momentum cuts: I'm currently cutting at 400 MeV/c for protons
> and 100 MeV/c for pions and kaons, but this probably needs to be looked
> into again and fine tuned.  I'm not sure what the best way is to do this
> yet.
>
> 9) Study the stability of the acceptance corrections: study the g, n -> p,
> p, pi- cross section as a function of run number to verify there are no
> problems (I will do this).
>
> Yikes!  Quite the long list.  That's why I need help!  I will do 1), 2),
> and 9).  I will probably end up doing/helping-with more of them, but the
> more help I can get the better ( 1) is going to be really hard...).  I
> don't think the other studies will be too involved (besides 5)): for
> example, I already sort-of did 3 & 4 but eye-balled them instead of coming
> up with a more rigorous standard.
>
> Please let me know what you think you can help with.  I'd like to get
> these studies done as soon as possible so that I (and others!) can start
> submitting our analyses for collaboration review.  Thanks!
>
>  - Paul
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> g13 mailing list
> g13 at jlab.org
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/g13
>