[Hadstruct] [EXTERNAL] Further work with NNPDF

[Konstantinos Orginos]

If this is the case then fine.

We should keep in mind that data we sent to NNPDF for further analysis should be data that we consider the best we have for now and the near future.
We cannot sent them everything that comes out to them right away. We will loose credibility if every   now and then we give the half baked results that may be contradicted later on.

K.

On Sep 22, 2020, at 2:05 PM, Savvas Zafeiropoulos <savvaslz at gmail.com<mailto:savvaslz at gmail.com>> wrote:

I think Joe's suggestion is to do something with NNPDF after we publish our distillation data alone as hadstruc...
>From both the heavy and lighter pion masses...

On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 8:03 PM Konstantinos Orginos <kostas at jlab.org<mailto:kostas at jlab.org>> wrote:
In my view we should first let Colin write the paper publish it and then discuss further collaboration with NNPDF.
By  adding new authors to a paper that is nearly complete is not in the best interests of  our own graduates students who  worked hard on this project
and deserve a first take in analysing and publishing the data without external interference.

Cheers,

Kostas.


> On Sep 22, 2020, at 1:56 PM, Joseph Karpie <jkarpie at gmail.com<mailto:jkarpie at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hey everyone,
>
> As some of you may know, a few of us are wrapping up a paper with Luigi Del Debbio and Tommaso Giana (NNPDF people) where they reanalyse our Gaussian smeared results using their tools. Tommaso sent around a number of suggestions for things to begin studying next, such as studying fit forms and using only high or low Ioffe time data.
>
> They have experience using sophisticated methods to perform the inverse and ways of accounting for systematic errors which can be very useful to us. I think we should discuss Friday what future work we would like to be doing with them.
>
> For example, I'd like to do a comparison of our Gaussian smeared results with the distillation results that have been made on the same ensemble when they are finalized. My thought is that the data are more or less consistent, but Colin's fits appear to have significantly better agreement with pheno results in the x > 0.5 region than my own fits or Tommaso's NNPDF fits to the Gaussian smeared data. I want to understand what difference between the results created this dramatic improvement. I believe working with NNPDF would make this task significantly easier due to their experience and tools.
>
> Best,
> Joe
> _______________________________________________
> Hadstruct mailing list
> Hadstruct at jlab.org<mailto:Hadstruct at jlab.org>
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hadstruct


_______________________________________________
Hadstruct mailing list
Hadstruct at jlab.org<mailto:Hadstruct at jlab.org>
https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hadstruct

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/hadstruct/attachments/20200922/55ec9f0c/attachment.html>