[Hps-analysis] HPS Analysis meeting Friday May 6 @ 8am/11am PDT/EDT

[Sho Uemura]

All plots are still from data, unless otherwise specified.

thingy_mc: same plot as "thingy" from before, but from tritrig-beam-tri. 
This plot looks very similar to the one from data. The visibility of the 
cutoff is strongly dependent on where on the Z scale it happens to 
fall: for Matt's plots, the MC plot happened to mostly put the cutoff on 
the green/blue divide, and the data plot didn't.

thingy_rotated: apply an ad-hoc skew so I can project the cutoff onto the 
X-axis.

thingy_proj: do the projection
thingy_mc_proj: same plot for MC, for comparison (shows cutoff in same 
place)

ecalxy_dark, ecalxy_bright, ecalxy: I cut the projected variable at 0.5 to 
split events into "bright" and "dark" sides of thingy, and plot the 
projected position at the ECal. You can see clearly that my cut is 
effectively a cut on ECal X, and the cutoff is at the edge of the electron 
gap.

So this cutoff is from the electron gap, and is the same in data and MC.

On Fri, 6 May 2016, Nelson, Timothy Knight wrote:

> I think there might be some structure there from the quantization of crystal positions.
>
> The bigger question is whether this is expected or not.  While one could posit that there might be more accidentals in data (is there background in the MC?) the momentum range where this cutoff occurs isn?t really in the vicinity of FEE momenta.
>
>> On May 6, 2016, at 4:31 PM, Graham, Mathew Thomas <mgraham at slac.stanford.edu> wrote:
>>
>> It looks like there are two ridges here (in the first plot; pY/P<0.025)?or am I seeing things?  Tracks that show up again on the other side of the gap?
>>
>>> On May 6, 2016, at 1:39 PM, Sho Uemura <meeg at slac.stanford.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> It's the ECal electron gap. See attached.
>>>
>>> On Fri, 6 May 2016, Nelson, Timothy Knight wrote:
>>>
>>>> So, I should add that Sho is right.  After drawing the tracks and seeing that they were skimming the edge of our acceptance at the back of the tracker, I simply assumed that the deficit in MC was caused by losing them outside our acceptance.  However, the tracks that are lost are the ones that fall *inside* our 6-layer acceptance.  This is even stranger.
>>>>
>>>> Tim
>>>>
>>>>> On May 5, 2016, at 4:22 PM, Graham, Mathew Thomas <mgraham at slac.stanford.edu> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No rest for the weary?we?ll have an analysis meeting tomorrow.
>>>>>
>>>>> Agenda:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/hpsg/May+6%2C+2016+DAWG+Meeting
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Connection Details:
>>>>>
>>>>> 	? Browser: https://bluejeans.com/722990411
>>>>> 	? Phone:  8882402560  722990411  ##  *4
>>>>>
>>>>> nb & mg
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>> <smallthetay.pdf><bigthetay.pdf><thingy.pdf>
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ecalxy.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 59544 bytes
Desc: 
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/hps-analysis/attachments/20160506/8062d792/attachment-0007.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ecalxy_dark.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 47051 bytes
Desc: 
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/hps-analysis/attachments/20160506/8062d792/attachment-0008.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ecalxy_bright.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 41065 bytes
Desc: 
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/hps-analysis/attachments/20160506/8062d792/attachment-0009.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: thingy_mc_proj.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 14714 bytes
Desc: 
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/hps-analysis/attachments/20160506/8062d792/attachment-0010.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: thingy_proj.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 14758 bytes
Desc: 
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/hps-analysis/attachments/20160506/8062d792/attachment-0011.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: thingy_rotated.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 43962 bytes
Desc: 
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/hps-analysis/attachments/20160506/8062d792/attachment-0012.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: thingy_mc.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 43130 bytes
Desc: 
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/hps-analysis/attachments/20160506/8062d792/attachment-0013.pdf>