<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"> P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} </style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt">
Sure if so it might be better that I give the last talk so that people not interested in this discussion can easily quit the session w/o missing anything or maybe we can discuss this at the next CAL meeting where all CAL experts are present? Also, I am not
proposing a new approach, I will just present what I have done for the PRIMEX data.
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt">
tks ig.</div>
<br>
</div>
<div id="appendonsend"></div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> Shepherd, Matthew <mashephe@indiana.edu><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, May 9, 2020 10:44 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Igal Jaegle <ijaegle@jlab.org><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Hall-D Calorimetry <halld-cal@jlab.org><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [EXTERNAL] new energy correction scheme</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="BodyFragment"><font size="2"><span style="font-size:11pt;">
<div class="PlainText"><br>
Hi Igal,<br>
<br>
I see that you checked in and merged a energy correction scheme for the FCAL. Could we discuss it in one of the afternoon sessions this week? Maybe Wednesday afternoon during your talk?<br>
<br>
In particular it would be great to show that it provides an improvement over the standard GlueX approach. If this is so, I am strongly in favor of using the PrimEx approach going forward in the future for GlueX. (Although probably not for the batch of data
we are about to process.)<br>
<br>
My concern is that if we end up diverging in how detectors are calibrated then it makes it harder to compare systematic uncertainties in GlueX and PrimEx data. There is generally an advantage to keep things as common as possible to minimize duplication of
effort in doing systematic checks which are incredibly time consuming, but of course I understand the need to meet PrimEx demands for low systematic errors.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
Matt<br>
<br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</body>
</html>