[G8b_run] analysis notes

Wed Feb 15 08:57:58 EST 2012

... is there someone around to initiate the call from the Jlab end?

On 02/14/2012 08:46 PM, Eugene Pasyuk wrote:
> I'll be calling in from the counting room
>
> -Eugene
>
> On 2/14/12 15:44 , Ken Livingston wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> Let's have a meeting tomorrow to discuss progress on analysis notes.
>> I've asked Dave Ireland to attend (as hadron spec chair) to discuss
>> options for merging / managing analysis reviews.
>>
>> I'll put up a page for the meeting tomorrow in the usual place.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ken
>>
>>
>> On 02/02/2012 10:33 AM, Ken Livingston wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>> There are some minutes from yesteday's call at
>>> https://clasweb.jlab.org/rungroups/g8/wiki/index.php/Feb_01,_2012
>>>
>>> I'll discuss the possibilities for combined reviews / analyses  with
>>> Dave Ireland as soon as possible.
>>>
>>> In the meantime, we should look at Volkers' draft analysis note and have
>>> comments ready. Its at:
>>> http://hadron.physics.fsu.edu/~crede/FILES/CHanrettyThesis.pdf
>>>
>>> I suggest that we add comments to this wiki page before the next meeting.
>>> https://clasweb.jlab.org/rungroups/g8/wiki/index.php/Polarization_observables_in_two_pion_production
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Ken
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 01/27/2012 10:21 PM, Michael Dugger wrote:
>>>> Volker,
>>>>
>>>> Yes.
>>>>
>>>> Using your criteria, I think that 4% would be a good estimate for the
>>>> systematic uncertainty associated with the consistency of the
>>>> polarization.
>>>>
>>>> Take care,
>>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012, Volker Crede wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear Michael,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the update. I have already implemented your new numbers and submitted a few jobs on our cluster.
>>>>>
>>>>> Neglecting the 2.1 GeV dataset and comparing the numbers in your table (Slide 3), would you agree that the data can still be made self-consistent to within 4%? This is the largest number I see in your table (for the 1.7 (auto) - 1.9 overlap region, PARA). My feeling is that your new results are even somewhat better than the previous ones. Can we conclude that 4% is a good estimate for the systematic error associated with the degree of polarization provided that:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) The latest polarization tables have been used.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) The polarization corrections (based on the overlap studies) have been applied.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) The event-based energy cut has been applied:  event edge - 200 MeV<     E(gamma)<     event edge.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best wishes and thanks again
>>>>>
>>>>>          Volker
>>>>>
>>>>> PS: I am sending this from my gmail account, so it may not go to the g8b run group. FSU has a huge email problem at the moment and JLab regularly rejects emails from @fsu.edu.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 27, 2012, at 2:24 PM, Michael Dugger wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have made some slight changes to the polarization modification. Volker
>>>>>> and Ken helped me determine that there was an inconsistency in how I was
>>>>>> determining which polarization look-up table to use for each event. The
>>>>>> inconsistency led to the coherent edge being wrong by up to 4 MeV (~ half
>>>>>> an eCounter).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The results are very similar to what I had shown previously. A pdf showing
>>>>>> a comparison of the new results to the old ones can be found at
>>>>>> http://www.jlab.org/Hall-B/secure/g8b/ASU/polCorrectionV3.pdf
>>>>>> where the new results are in blue.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Note: There is one difference in results worth mentioning. I no longer see
>>>>>> the need to remove eCounters>     299 (within the overlap region) for the 1.9
>>>>>> GeV data set :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To implement the new modification, one only needs to replace the ldPar
>>>>>> values with the those given at the bottom of this email (also listed on
>>>>>> the pdf).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>
>>>>>> New ldPar values:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1.3 manual
>>>>>> ldPar(1) = 1.007560
>>>>>> ldPar(2) =-0.5872520E-02
>>>>>> ldPar(4) = 1.012520
>>>>>> ldPar(5) =-0.6416970E-02
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1.5 manual
>>>>>> ldPar(1) = 1.012790
>>>>>> ldPar(2) =-0.4507690E-02
>>>>>> ldPar(4) = 1.002800
>>>>>> ldPar(5) =-0.1880110E-02
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1.7 manual
>>>>>> ldPar(1) = 0.9893110
>>>>>> ldPar(2) =-0.1880110E-02
>>>>>> ldPar(4) = 0.9893210
>>>>>> ldPar(5) =-0.2127790E-02
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1.7 auto
>>>>>> ldPar(1) = 0.9962880
>>>>>> ldPar(2) =-0.1159220E-02
>>>>>> ldPar(4) = 1.030480
>>>>>> ldPar(5) =-0.1110110E-01
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1.9 auto
>>>>>> ldPar(1) = 1.012930
>>>>>> ldPar(2) =-0.2772200E-02
>>>>>> ldPar(4) = 0.9998200
>>>>>> ldPar(5) =-0.1616160E-02
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2.1 manual
>>>>>> ldPar(1) = 0.9968230
>>>>>> ldPar(2) =-0.2214870E-01
>>>>>> ldPar(4) = 1.007930
>>>>>> ldPar(5) =-0.7647950E-02
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> G8b_run mailing list
>>>>>> G8b_run at jlab.org
>>>>>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/g8b_run
>>>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> G8b_run mailing list
>>> G8b_run at jlab.org
>>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/g8b_run
>> _______________________________________________
>> G8b_run mailing list
>> G8b_run at jlab.org
>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/g8b_run
> _______________________________________________
> G8b_run mailing list
> G8b_run at jlab.org
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/g8b_run

-- 
=======================================================
Ken Livingston

Dept. of Physics&  Astronomy,        Tel: +44 141 330 6428
University of Glasgow,               Fax: +44 141 330 5889
Glasgow G12 8QQ.
Scotland. UK.
=======================================================