[Hybrid baryons] Event weight

[Gleb Fedotov]

Dear Victor,

Thank you very much for your comments!

Probably you have slightly misunderstood the definition of the weight.
Eq. 2.5 does not stand for the weight that is assigned in the
simulation. The Sections 4.1,4.2 are dedicated to the explanation of
the weights and their calculation in various ranges in W and Q2.


Best regards,
         Gleb and Iuliia.


On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Viktor Mokeev <mokeev at jlab.org> wrote:
>  Hi All,
>
>  I have a question in regards of paragraph Section 3.1, lines 158-162.
>
>  Our physics event is the electron scattering pi^+pi^-p exclusive event. Therefore, it should be weighted with exclusive electron scattering cross section for ep--->e'p'pi^+pi^- reaction. The cross section for the aforementioned reaction is the product cross section
> of Eq. (2.5) and virtual photon flux. You can NOT weight phase space evens with the cross section of Eq. (2.5). From lines 158-162 it is not clear with which cross section you weight the events.
>
>  Which weight you assign in the simulations done? I appreciate your timely answer.
>
>   Best Regards,
>                   Victor
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Viktor Mokeev" <mokeev at jlab.org>
> To: "Gleb Fedotov" <gleb at jlab.org>, "Юлия Скородумина" <skorodumina at gmail.com>, "Ralf Gothe" <gothe at sc.edu>
> Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2016 8:40:34 AM
> Subject: Re: New Npipi paper based on Gleb data
>
> Additional question:
>
>  How do you get W=4.5 GeV as the upper W-boundary for the EG? Currentlt pi^+pi^-p photoproduction data are availasble up tp W=2.5 GeV.
>
>   Best Regards,
>                     Victor
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Viktor Mokeev" <mokeev at jlab.org>
> To: "Gleb Fedotov" <gleb at jlab.org>, "Юлия Скородумина" <skorodumina at gmail.com>, "Ralf Gothe" <gothe at sc.edu>
> Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2016 8:25:23 AM
> Subject: Re: New Npipi paper based on Gleb data
>
> Hi Gleb and Iulia,
>
>
>  What is the W vs Q^2 area where your EG is applicable? It should be written in the abstract in terms of: W from.... to ...,
> Q^2 from... to....
>
>  It should be clear from Fig. 4.1 Currently I am confused with Fig.4.1 part VIII. We have Isupov data approved by HSWG. The paper is ion the final step of the Ad Hoc discussion and hopefully will be submitted by the March 2017.
>
> Either you should specify sharp boundaries over W and Q^2 for EG or compare based on Eq (4.4), (4.6) extrapolation with preliminary Isupov/Hicks data.
>
>    Best Regards,
>                       Victor
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Viktor Mokeev" <mokeev at jlab.org>
> To: "Gleb Fedotov" <gleb at jlab.org>, "Юлия Скородумина" <skorodumina at gmail.com>, "Ralf Gothe" <gothe at sc.edu>
> Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2016 7:50:40 PM
> Subject: New Npipi paper based on Gleb data
>
> Dear Colleagues,
>
>  I would expect the conclusion of the HSWG review of new Gleb Npipi data in 2016. I propose to discuss the paper preparation plan Jan 4, Wednesday
> 9 am EST through Blue Jean. Please let me know, if you have conflict with this time or you disagree with the proposal.
>
>
>   Best Regards,
>                         Victor