[Primexd] FCAL gain/energy calibration

[Igal Jaegle]

Thank you Matt for your comments. In principle, I am doing the QC only on "good" physics runs (target filled) but there is something indeed fishy with the He data and/or hopefully only with the new pi0 skims that I produced. For example, after a couple of iteration, I am able to improve dramatically the pi0 resolution for the Be run and for the beginning of the He run, but for the rest of the He run, the resolution is barely improving after each iteration.

All,

In the meantime, I implemented new ranges but there is a subdivision that needs to be done.

tks ig.


________________________________
From: Shepherd, Matthew <mashephe at indiana.edu>
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 11:23 AM
To: Igal Jaegle <ijaegle at jlab.org>
Cc: primexd at jlab.org <primexd at jlab.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Primexd] FCAL gain/energy calibration


Hi Igal,

These plots are interesting, particularly the discrete jumps.  I went back to to look at the logs and some boundaries, I think the ones you marked, correspond to target empty/refill, right?

Without run numbers, it is hard to do detailed detective work, but I recommend taking a look at the He 1 period more closely.  There is one anomalous point where the pi0 mass is high that I predict might be run 61462.  At this point, by reading the eLog, it appears that there was an attempt to run with CDC in the data stream.  That was then abandoned because RootSpy wasn't working properly, and running continued, perhaps restoring pi0 mass back to its previous value.  Then the next day Sasha got CDC working in the data stream and again the pi0 mass returned to the high value.

Likewise, there are two jumps at the end of the He 3 run period that you have marked,  These appear to coincide with particular changes to include/exclude the FDC in the readout.

Naively, the gain of the FCAL shouldn't change whether or not the chambers are read out.  Perhaps it is purely coincidence, but I have a little concern you might be treating a symptom instead of getting at the root cause by adjusting gains.

Could your plots (perhaps backgrounds) be sensitive to presence/absence of tracks when the CDC or FDC hits appear/disappear?

Matt


On Apr 11, 2020, at 11:28 AM, Igal Jaegle <ijaegle at jlab.org<mailto:ijaegle at jlab.org>> wrote:

PrimeXDeurs,

The QC shows that two new gain tables should be changed/added for the following run ranges: 61482-61570 and 61789-61910

tks ig.


<Mean_vs_run_number_eta.pdf><Width_vs_run_number_eta.pdf><Mean_vs_run_number_pi0.pdf><Width_vs_run_number_pi0.pdf>_______________________________________________
Primexd mailing list
Primexd at jlab.org<mailto:Primexd at jlab.org>
https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/primexd

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/primexd/attachments/20200413/be952916/attachment-0002.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Mean_vs_run_number_pi0.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 28200 bytes
Desc: Mean_vs_run_number_pi0.pdf
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/primexd/attachments/20200413/be952916/attachment-0008.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Width_vs_run_number_eta.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 31918 bytes
Desc: Width_vs_run_number_eta.pdf
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/primexd/attachments/20200413/be952916/attachment-0009.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Mean_vs_run_number_eta.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 32838 bytes
Desc: Mean_vs_run_number_eta.pdf
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/primexd/attachments/20200413/be952916/attachment-0010.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Width_vs_run_number_pi0.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 24059 bytes
Desc: Width_vs_run_number_pi0.pdf
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/primexd/attachments/20200413/be952916/attachment-0011.pdf>