<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Updated PDF:</p>
<p>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://userweb.jlab.org/~marki/share/Pi0Polarizability_2020-06-15.pdf">https://userweb.jlab.org/~marki/share/Pi0Polarizability_2020-06-15.pdf</a></p>
<p>Remember the up-to-the-minute version is at</p>
<p> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.overleaf.com/project/5d5d22c3f2f2fe72b728c4e6">https://www.overleaf.com/project/5d5d22c3f2f2fe72b728c4e6</a></p>
<p>Also remember that you can download the current PDF from the
Overleaf site.<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 6/12/20 8:59 PM, Mark Ito wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:6b560f6a-9cd1-d542-2f19-3dc97e52ab38@jlab.org">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<p>Folks,</p>
<p>I did a capture into GitHub of the document on Overleaf just
now. For convenience, I created a PDF of this version which you
can find at</p>
<p> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://userweb.jlab.org/~marki/share/Pi0Polarizability_2020-06-12.pdf"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://userweb.jlab.org/~marki/share/Pi0Polarizability_2020-06-12.pdf</a></p>
<p> -- Mark<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 6/12/20 5:08 PM, Elton Smith
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:5EE3EEDC.3050300@jlab.org">Dear
collaborators, <br>
<br>
I have posted some minutes of today's meeting on the wiki at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://halldweb.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/Pi0_Polarizability_Meeting_Jun_12,_2020#Minutes"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://halldweb.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/Pi0_Polarizability_Meeting_Jun_12,_2020#Minutes</a>.<br>
<br>
I have also updated the draft on Overleaf with the latest
changes. Please provide feedback as soon as possible so that we
can post an update for the collaboration early next week. <br>
<br>
Note: I updated the summary plot (Fig. 29 of the proposal). We
state that the (statistical) uncertainties are obtained directly
from the fit (Fig. 21). It turns out the AmpTools fits provide
very reasonable errors near threshold where the statistics are
large, but give very small uncertainties at high mass. If we use
the fitted statistical uncertainties directly, I get the
attached plot. One can see that at large masses, the uncertainty
converges to the 5% systematic uncertainty. There are only 10-20
Primakoff-pi0pi0 events in this mass region. This is very likely
an underestimate of the true statistical uncertainly. [Note that
this is a well-known fact of the output of the Amplitude fit.]
Therefore, I have produced a hybrid plot, where I use fitted
errors where the statistics is large and the "naive" statistical
uncertainty if the fitted uncertainty is very small. The plot
that is included into the document uses the latter strategy. We
can talk about this next week. <br>
<br>
Cheers, Elton. <br>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Halld-npp mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Halld-npp@jlab.org" moz-do-not-send="true">Halld-npp@jlab.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/halld-npp" moz-do-not-send="true">https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/halld-npp</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>