[Hps-analysis] Moller Gap Update

[Valery Kubarovsky]

Brad,

Could you please provide for me these distributions, integrated:
1. Delta t for clusters
2. Phi1 vs Phi2 of tracks on target
3. Delta phi for tracks on the target
4. Energy distribution from tracks
5. E1 vs E2
6. Energy sum from tracks
7. Y vs X of the tracks on the face of the calorimeter
8. Y vs X of clusters

Cuts:
A. No cuts at all
B. Energy E < 1.8
C. AND |Delta phi|< 20 degrees
D. AND Delta t < 2 sigmas
E. AND |Esum-2.3|<0.1

So you will create plots with cuts:
A only, A and B, A and B and C, A and B and C and D, A and B and C and D and E

You will do it for Data and MC.

Thank you,
Valery





----- Original Message -----
> From: "Nathan Baltzell" <baltzell at jlab.org>
> To: "Bradley T Yale" <btu29 at wildcats.unh.edu>
> Cc: hps-analysis at jlab.org, "Valery Kubarovsky" <vpk at jlab.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 8:41:39 AM
> Subject: Re: [Hps-analysis] Moller Gap Update

> Or from the opposite direction:  do you have good requirements on cluster-track
> matching in the real data?  If this MC is from a purely Moller event generator
> (no beam backgrounds to trigger on accidentals), then just poor cluster-track
> matching for the data could explain the data/MC discrepancy.
> 
> -nathan
> 
> 
> On Apr 15, 2016, at 16:00, Nathan Baltzell <baltzell at jlab.org> wrote:
> 
>> So it is due to ecal acceptance?  Then is it possible to replot
>> reconstructed mc without ecal (trigger) requirements?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Apr 15, 2016, at 15:41, Bradley T Yale <btu29 at wildcats.unh.edu> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> Here is the data for comparison, same SVT cut.
>>> There are more hits away from the corner, and so no gap in the energy.
>>> 
>>> From: Hps-analysis <hps-analysis-bounces at jlab.org> on behalf of Bradley T Yale
>>> <btu29 at wildcats.unh.edu>
>>> Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 3:33 PM
>>> To: hps-analysis at jlab.org; Valery Kubarovsky
>>> Subject: [Hps-analysis] Moller Gap Update
>>> 
>>> I think I may have found the cause as to what is causing that dip in the 2.3 GeV
>>> Moller track energy after recon:
>>> Not the generator. Pure geometric acceptance.
>>> 
>>> Plots 1-2: 1.056 GeV MC is suspiciously free of dips after recon, and the hot
>>> ECal hits are all above the electron hole.
>>> This is using the old generator by the way.
>>> 
>>> Plots 3-4: These are only the Mollers which had that strange "gap" in layer 5
>>> SVT hits (-9 to -13 mm). The final plot shows the gap.
>>> Notice where they land on the ECal.
>>> 
>>> So it seems that the corner of the electron hole happens to be where electrons
>>> with exactly half the beam energy go for 2.3 GeV...
>>> 
>>> -Brad
>>> <neg_hits.png><TRACK_Energy.png><WTF_gap.png><GapTrackE.png>_______________________________________________
>>> Hps-analysis mailing list
>>> Hps-analysis at jlab.org
>>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hps-analysis
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Hps-analysis mailing list
>> Hps-analysis at jlab.org
> > https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hps-analysis