[Halld-unique] [EXTERNAL] Wednesday's report

[zihlmann]

Hi Sean,
thanks for the comments. I implemented most of them and updated the talk.
I agree with your assessments in particular 15 and 33 where I was clearly
unclear ;-)

with regards to the 10-20% I am not sure that is an extrema, I fear not. 
I will point
out though that this number has the statistics of 1 out of 1.

I uploaded a new version that hopefully addresses most of you concerns.

Beni

On 8/25/20 11:04 PM, Sean Dobbs wrote:
> Hi Beni,
>
> Sorry for sending this so late, but here are some additional thoughts
> on your slide:
>
> Title:  The more we talk about this, the more I think that "uniqueness
> tracking" is really misleading, and we should give this a more
> accurate title, and only refer to uniqueness tracking when it comes up
> in context.  I think you describe the problem essentially as "event
> counting", which I think is a better description of the problem, but
> one could call this "Combinatorics" as well.
>
> But in general my perspective is that this is really a counting
> problem, hence inherently statistical.  If we solve it on the
> individual event basis, then this is fine, but not necessary.
>
> Slide 2: Maybe at the beginning you should say that we are starting
> out trying to discuss the counting problem for cross section
> measurements, will move onto Dalitz/etc. examples later on.
>
> Slide 15:  There are a couple "What to do then?"s.  I think you should
> make it a little more clear that the answers to these questions will
> be outputs from our group's discussions.  But it might be good to pull
> a couple example plots from your other presentation - even if we
> haven't 100% decided what to do, I think having some concrete examples
> helps move the discussion forward.
>
> Honestly, I think that expanding on the plots that you have right now,
> and showing the invariant mass as a function of the number of showers
> in the event is really valuable for deciding what to do - this is
> clearly future work, but you can, for example, show the mass
> distribution with only 6 photons and with more than 6 photons.
>
> Slide 33: It's not clear to me that your first case of over-counting
> is correct.  In principle it can be true for the measured 4-vectors,
> but maybe not for the kinematically fit 4-vectors.  Also, even though
> this discussion puts it aside, isn't it the case that we remove by
> accidental subtracting, anyway?
>
> Slide 35:  I think this 10-20% is a pretty extreme case and we should say so...
>
> Again, I think that these will give some good discussion, and we
> should move towards working out some examples more fully.
>
> Cheers,
> Sean
> _______________________________________________
> Halld-unique mailing list
> Halld-unique at jlab.org
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/halld-unique

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/halld-unique/attachments/20200826/0a114585/attachment.html>