[G8b_run] Analysis note for KY

[Ken Livingston]

Hi Micheal,
I think you're mixing up the Start Counter with the TOF.  The issue was 
with the TOF paddles. We're not requiring a pion - which was where the 
biggest effect was, so the effect to our stats is not much, and the 
effect on the acceptance cancels.
Could be an issue for the recoil pol, where acceptance matters, but we 
only look at this to confirm that it's in fair agreement with older CLAS 
data. For extraction of doubles we use the measured values of recoil pol 
from previous CLAS measurement.

We should not raise the question of recooking with the committee. If 
they raise it we should explain that the effect is small for us, and 
will give an estimate of how small.

Regards,
Ken




On 17/05/13 12:36, dugger at jlab.org wrote:
> Dave,
>
> It would depend on the pid scheme that you use. If you require that each
> final state particle has all relevant detector elements present, then you
> would benefit from a recook. The problem we are seeing -IF I have this
> correctly- is that there is an effective software-threshold set on the
> start counter paddles. So if you do not have a strict requirement on the
> presence of a start counter for each particle, then you should be good to
> go.
>
> This is assuming that I understand the current situation correctly. (I'm
> sure my fellow g8b collaborators will correct me if I got this wrong).
>
> Take care,
> Michael
>
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I realise it was a big ask to take a look through the note in one week.
>>
>> However, one thing I would like everyone's opinion on is whether there
>> is any need to recook the data before submitting this note for review.
>> If not, we will have to have a solid set of reasons why not. I am just
>> asking because that's just my impression of what is likely to happen in
>> a review committee.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/05/2013 15:46, David Ireland wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I now have a draft analysis note for the g8 measurements on K-Lambda and
>>> K-Sigma. This is essentially what I reported on at the last Working
>>> Group meeting. As it is too big a file to circulate, you can find it at
>>> http://nuclear.gla.ac.uk/~clasg8/Analysis/PatersonKLambdaAnalysis.pdf
>>>
>>> I would like to get this into the review process as soon as possible, so
>>> could you let me have any feedback by *Friday 17 May*.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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.
=======================================================