[G14_run] G14_run Digest, Vol 74, Issue 3 (Tuneo's question to K Sigma analysis note)

Sat Nov 4 23:37:34 EDT 2017

Any asymmetry can be anything between -1 and +1, 0 included. For any observable which may be equal to 0 relative uncertainty does not make sense. Only absolute uncertainty must be used.
The second term in Nick's equation is equal to 0 if ObservableValue is always equal to 0 regardless of sigma_sys_relative. This is incorrect but good illustration why one must not use relative uncertainty for asymmetries. 

-Eugene

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tsuneo Kageya" <kageya at jlab.org>
> To: "Nicholas Zachariou" <nicholas at jlab.org>
> Cc: "g14 run" <g14_run at jlab.org>
> Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 10:57:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [G14_run] G14_run Digest, Vol 74, Issue 3 (Tuneo's  question to K Sigma analysis note)

> Nick,
> 
> thank you for the response.
> I would like to know why the absolute is more appropriate.
> I will look forward the statements.
> 
>     Regards, Tsuneo Kageya.
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Nicholas Zachariou" <nicholas at jlab.org>
> To: "Tsuneo Kageya" <kageya at jlab.org>
> Cc: "g14 run" <g14_run at jlab.org>
> Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 3:23:46 PM
> Subject: Re: [G14_run] G14_run Digest, Vol 74, Issue 3 (Tuneo's  question to K
> Sigma analysis note)
> 
> Hi Tsuneo,
> 
> The absolute error is propagated directly to the total uncertainty
> (sigma_tot=sqrt(sigma_sys_absolute^2+(ObservableValue*sigma_sys_relative)^2 +
> sigma_statistical^2).
> 
> I can elaborate more if you like on why thats the case (why absolute are more
> appropriate in my case). I will include some statements in the note to reflect
> this.
> 
> Let me know if you would like to discuss this more.
> 
> Best regards,
> Nick
> 
> On Nov 4, 2017, 19:12, at 19:12, Tsuneo Kageya <kageya at jlab.org> wrote:
>>Hi Nick,
>>
>> Sorry to be late to make a question.
>> I have a question about the systematic error calculations.
>>
>>At page 35, on the table 4, you calculated the total absolute
>>systematic error
>>to be 0.10.   How this is reflected into the total relative systematic
>>error ?
>>On the pi-p analysis, I think we calculated the systematic errors from
>>cuts in
>>the similar way and they are combined to the other errors (target and
>>beam polarizations).
>>Is this number 0.10 means 10 % or 0.1 % ?
>>
>> I may misunderstand this issue.  Please let me know.
>>
>>    Regards, Tsuneo Kageya.
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "g14 run-request" <g14_run-request at jlab.org>
>>To: "g14 run" <g14_run at jlab.org>
>>Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 12:00:03 PM
>>Subject: G14_run Digest, Vol 74, Issue 3
>>
>>Send G14_run mailing list submissions to
>>	g14_run at jlab.org
>>
>>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>	https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/g14_run
>>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>	g14_run-request at jlab.org
>>
>>You can reach the person managing the list at
>>	g14_run-owner at jlab.org
>>
>>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>>than "Re: Contents of G14_run digest..."
>>
>>
>>Today's Topics:
>>
>>   1. Re: Updated Analysis Note (Reinhard Schumacher)
>>   2. Re: Updated Analysis Note (Nicholas Zachariou)
>>
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>Message: 1
>>Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2017 22:19:24 -0400
>>From: Reinhard Schumacher <schumacher at cmu.edu>
>>To: g14_run at jlab.org
>>Subject: Re: [G14_run] Updated Analysis Note
>>Message-ID: <a5780718-56ac-1dc0-44e8-6b991dbf849b at cmu.edu>
>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed"
>>
>>Hi Nick,
>>
>>Indeed, noticeably improved.?? I recommend that you put the horizontal
>>error bars on Figs.? 29 - 32, too.? They are just as important there
>>since the model curves can vary a lot across one bin.
>>
>>Reinhard
>>
>>
>>On 11/3/2017 7:13 PM, Nicholas Zachariou wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> I am attaching the updated note that incorporates and addresses all
>>comments made. I have noticed that I have previously forgotten to
>>include the systematic uncertainty associated with the
>>photon-selection, and is now estimated and included.
>>> I would like to thank again Shumacher for his time and valuable
>>insight, and everybody for the comments and feedback. If there is no
>>other comments, I will be submitting the note early next week.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Nick
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> G14_run mailing list
>>> G14_run at jlab.org
>>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/g14_run
>>
>>--
>>___________________________________________________________________
>>Reinhard Schumacher         Department of Physics, 5000 Forbes Ave.
>>Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, U.S.A.
>>phone: 412-268-5177         web: www-meg.phys.cmu.edu/~schumach
>>___________________________________________________________________
>>
>>-------------- next part --------------
>>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>URL:
>><https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/g14_run/attachments/20171103/651ca313/attachment-0001.html>
>>
>>------------------------------
>>
>>Message: 2
>>Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2017 07:10:14 +0000
>>From: Nicholas Zachariou <nicholas at jlab.org>
>>To: Reinhard Schumacher <schumacher at cmu.edu>
>>Cc: G14 Run <g14_run at jlab.org>
>>Subject: Re: [G14_run] Updated Analysis Note
>>Message-ID: <d21ed42f-6b13-482d-8c8b-4ea087ad31e1 at jlab.org>
>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>>Hi Reinhard,
>>
>>The figures looked a bit busy when I did that (too many lines) and
>>thats why i left the x-uncertainties out in those, but its takes me 2
>>minutes to incorborate them. I think that will be more relevant when we
>>decide exactly how to present our results in the publication.
>>
>>In the meantime I was wondering if its OK with the group to share our
>>preliminary results with the theorists and see if we can get any
>>insights from them.
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Nick
>>
>>
>>On Nov 4, 2017, 02:19, at 02:19, Reinhard Schumacher
>><schumacher at cmu.edu> wrote:
>>>Hi Nick,
>>>
>>>Indeed, noticeably improved.?? I recommend that you put the horizontal
>>
>>>error bars on Figs.? 29 - 32, too.? They are just as important there
>>>since the model curves can vary a lot across one bin.
>>>
>>>Reinhard
>>>
>>>
>>>On 11/3/2017 7:13 PM, Nicholas Zachariou wrote:
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> I am attaching the updated note that incorporates and addresses all
>>>comments made. I have noticed that I have previously forgotten to
>>>include the systematic uncertainty associated with the
>>>photon-selection, and is now estimated and included.
>>>> I would like to thank again Shumacher for his time and valuable
>>>insight, and everybody for the comments and feedback. If there is no
>>>other comments, I will be submitting the note early next week.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Nick
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> G14_run mailing list
>>>> G14_run at jlab.org
>>>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/g14_run
>>>
>>>--
>>>___________________________________________________________________
>>>Reinhard Schumacher         Department of Physics, 5000 Forbes Ave.
>>>Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, U.S.A.
>>>phone: 412-268-5177         web: www-meg.phys.cmu.edu/~schumach
>>>___________________________________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>G14_run mailing list
>>>G14_run at jlab.org
>>>https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/g14_run
>>-------------- next part --------------
>>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>URL:
>><https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/g14_run/attachments/20171104/14965baf/attachment-0001.html>
>>
>>------------------------------
>>
>>Subject: Digest Footer
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>G14_run mailing list
>>G14_run at jlab.org
>>https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/g14_run
>>
>>
>>------------------------------
>>
>>End of G14_run Digest, Vol 74, Issue 3
>>**************************************
>>_______________________________________________
>>G14_run mailing list
>>G14_run at jlab.org
>>https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/g14_run
> _______________________________________________
> G14_run mailing list
> G14_run at jlab.org
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/g14_run