[Sane-analysis] [Fwd: Re: Minutes from 12/02/09 Meeting]

[narbe at jlab.org]

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Re: [Sane-analysis] Minutes from 12/02/09 Meeting
From:    anusha at jlab.org
Date:    Wed, December 2, 2009 5:35 pm
To:      "Narbe Kalantarians" <narbe at jlab.org>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

hi Narbe,
if you don't mind,
i would like you to edit one of the line from your email.
it is under my name.
it is not as following.
"where
> coincidence timing is shifted to about 5ns and reshifted that to 0 to
> make timing cuts more feasible. This only gained about 0.5%. "

this is the correct thing,
I shifted the coincidence timing to 0 to make timing cuts more feasible.(i
didn't shift it to 5ns at first. this is the first time i shifted). Then I
used the timing cut around +/- 5ns and that only gained about 4-5 %

thanks
Anusha

>
> *_Narbe_*:
> Working on altering HMS(single) MC for BETA. With help from Mark Jones,
> got a simple version where "BETA" is a box with the actual dimensions.
> This is to set up for obtaining dilution factors for the BETA data. Will
> work on making it more realistic later on.
>
>
> *_Hoyoung_*:
> http://www.jlab.org/~hykang/HMS_asym/?M=D
> Redid HMS and BETA asymmetries with Hovannes' updated code. The signs
> for these now seem consistent. The different shapes can be attributed to
> the different kinematics for each spectrometer.
>
> Also made a table of  the asymmetries (HMS right now). The dead-times
> used are those for BETA though. Will redo and also make one for BETA.
>
> _*Anusha*_:
> https://hallcweb.jlab.org/experiments/sane/wiki/index.php/Tracking_Efficiency
> Working on tracking efficiency for coincidence data. Efficiency for the
> coincidence data has been low (approx 40%). The polygon cut managed to
> recover only about 2%. Looked at Cerenkov time spectrum, where
> coincidence timing is shifted to about 5ns and reshifted that to 0 to
> make timing cuts more feasible. This only gained about 0.5%. Looked then
> at hdc 1 and 2 and found there is a considerable amount of background.
> And selecting the coincidence from the rest of the data (via tracking).
>
> _*
> Luwani*_:
> http://www.jlab.org/~lzwano/BMP_71809-71914.pdf
> Looked at early runs (around 01/24/09). These were around the times test
> runs , cross-hair, and beam position studies were being done. Will look
> at first C and NH3 runs that started around 01/30/09. This is 4.7GeV
> perp data.
> Made color SR plots and will show next time. Working on finals during
> right now so can only devote so much time.
>
> _*
> James*_:
> https://hallcweb.jlab.org/experiments/sane/wiki/index.php/Magnet_Re-energization_Log
> Made a log of the times the target magnet was reenergized during
> running. This also lists when heater was turned on.
> Obtained EPICS data relevant to target from database Steve Wood prepared
> into a spreadsheet on TWIST. Will use this to look at microwave
> frequencies and online target polarization during for the runs that have
> been showing asymmetries decaying to zero, seen in previous meetings.
>
>
> _*Jonathon*_:
> Looking at asymmetries with SR region cut. Has not seen any dependence
> of asymmetries on SR for the parallel field data. Oscar has seen such
> dependence in the perpendicular data. Will look more into this.
>
> Pertaining to the issue of the decaying asymmetries, there was
> discussion of whether this could be from beam.
> There is a summary of the Moller information
> https://hallcweb.jlab.org/experiments/sane/wiki/index.php/Moller_Polarimeter
> There doesn't seem to be enough difference seen to account for the
> amount of decay. It could also be useful to check the other halls to see
> if they noticed any significant polarization decay during that time.
> Oscar suggested looking at HMS asymmetry as a function of the beam z
> vertex, to see if this changes over the z-vertex. The potentially useful
> data for doing this is HMS data at theta=22degrees.
>
>
> _*Whit*_:
> http://quarks.temple.edu/~whit/SANE/ANN/
> Looking at neural-network for both BigCal as well as magnetic field for
> target studies. Mapped reals (E,theta,phi) comparing simulation and
> neural-network results (nn_bcplane_***.ps).
>
> Made plots (BC_***.ps) of BigCal blocks (top) and positions (bottom)
> populated in parallel and perpendicular field settings (field_***.ps).
> Found discernible differences from the 2 settings.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sane-analysis mailing list
> Sane-analysis at jlab.org
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/sane-analysis