[Sane-analysis] Correction to d2 update: Nachtmann moments

[O. A. Rondon]

I found bugs in the calculation of the Q^(3/2)trend curves (actually
plotted was Q^3, which, in any case, doesn't make much sense anyway).

An updated file, with more sensible 1/sqrt(Q^2) trend curves and an
extra plot including the inelastic piece of RSS d2, is now posted.
 https://userweb.jlab.org/~rondon/analysis/asym/world/d2.pdf

Cheers,

Oscar

O. A. Rondon wrote:
> Here is d2 calculated using both C-N and Natchmann moments. The top plot
> on p. 3 shows d2 calculated as before using AAC 2003 g1 and g1 from my
> A1, A2(W, Q^2) fits to SANE and SLAC data, but computing the M_2^3
> Nachtmann moment, instead of the C-N one (The C-N results are on p. 1,
> with updated labels).
> 
> The difference between d2 for the two input g1's is smaller for
> Nachtmann than for C-N (about 1/2). At 5 GeV^2, the agreement with the
> published C-N SLAC average also improves.
> https://userweb.jlab.org/~rondon/analysis/asym/world/d2.pdf
> 
> The expression for the M_2^n=3 moment is taken from eq. 3 of the RSS PRL
> on twist-3,
> http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v105/i10/e101601
> 
> Since the OPE moments are based on measured SSF's, target mass effects
> (as opposed to Target Mass corrections) were applied to the g1 SSF from
> the (asymptotic) AAC PDF's, to make it approximate the experimental
> values, in order to combine it with the g2 SSF from the A1, A2 fits to
> data. (The NMC F1 used to get the SSF's from the SA's is a
> parameterization of experimental data, so it does not need target mass
> effects; this should be kept in mind if F1 from PDF's is used at some
> point). The bottom plot on p. 3 shows d2 for AAC g1 with and without
> target mass effects. It's a  small but not totally negligible difference
> (~20% at 5 GeV^2).
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Oscar
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>