[Moller_intdet] [EXTERNAL] Re: Integrating Detector meeting

[Michael Gericke]

Hi KK,

Where the background comes from is irrelevant. What matters is whether 
it makes as signal in the detector.

Not all of us can call into every simulation meeting and the information 
flow between these meetings is not working very well. So we are not 
always aware of the most recent results
that come out of the simulations.

So please, to everyone:

If your simulation results suggest a new rate above threshold energy in 
the detector or affect the detector in any way whatsoever, please at 
least present a summary in the detector
meeting, if you can.

I leave it to the simulators to decide when they have something they 
want to present in the detector meeting, but as far as the detector is 
concerned I want to people to consider the
simulation meetings just as a starting point (for technical details 
related to that) while the results should be presented in the detector 
meeting.

Thanks,

Michael

On 2023-02-19 1:03 p.m., Michael Gericke wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The detector sees all events in the envelope, not just primaries. So, 
> generally, if there is an increased background due to new geometry 
> that enters the detector, the corresponding
> simulations and the implications should be discussed in the detector 
> meeting.
>
> Of course, people should be able to present their work where they 
> choose to, but if it is detector related or effects the detector 
> design and the signal it sees in any way
> it would be preferable to have it presented in the integrating 
> detector meeting, even for simulations. That way, we can also properly 
> account for any event rate changes in the signal
> that would influence the electronics design etc.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael
>
> On 2023-02-19 12:22 p.m., Krishna Kumar wrote:
>> Hi, Folks. I was not able to attend Thursday's meeting but heard 
>> about the tile geometry analysis update. I had a quick discussion 
>> with Cip and Zuhal about it on Friday. We agreed that we need to 
>> separate the analysis into two separate tracks:
>>
>> - In order to test the tile geometry and possible overlaps and gaps, 
>> one must look only at primary particles from the target. This is 
>> clearly an integrating detector meeting discussion to ensure the 
>> geometry is doing what was intended in the detector plane analyses.
>>
>> - A separate issue is that there seems to be a surprising number of 
>> secondary electrons above 1 MeV. It is clear from new plots that 
>> these are not associated directly with the main high energy flux. 
>> These should be reviewed separately and it is more of a simulation 
>> meeting discussion.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> KK
>>
>>
>>> On Feb 16, 2023, at 2:02 PM, Michael Gericke via Moller_intdet 
>>> <moller_intdet at jlab.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> This is a reminder that our regularly scheduled detector meeting 
>>> will take place today, at 4:00 pm EST.
>>>
>>> The wiki link for the meeting is:
>>>
>>> https://moller.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/Int_Det_Mtg_230216
>>>
>>> If you have anything to present, please add it to the agenda.
>>>
>>> Please note that the zoom link has changed.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>>> Join Zoom Meeting
>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__ca01web.zoom.us_j_92766807065-3Fpwd-3DWDNPdTM3SW4wRTd3RHVWdWhWeGpkQT09&d=DwIFAg&c=CJqEzB1piLOyyvZjb8YUQw&r=n8yp2esm0KFRKpaGXzCWkswkaFnv92cJmpaE2yrYpV8&m=80ZtrYS2ajEnHAuah46y72a5UTbsXLEEmMDilBC752SIynWWvnp17dX2JwM3KHey&s=0hKmtmPZuNSn9Hp8ikDX2CXXW_qv-KBiyEnptc3yGLA&e= 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Moller_intdet mailing list
>>> Moller_intdet at jlab.org
>>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/moller_intdet