[Sbs] TDIS proposal (fwd)

[Brian Quinn]

Dear SBS collaborators,

   Thia has asked me to circulate the attached proposal on Tagged DIS. The 
collaboration is being asked to endorse the proposal so "The SBS 
Collaboration" can be included in the list of proposers.  We have not yet 
formalized a mechanism for endorsing proposals.  In tomorrow's meeting we 
should discuss such a mechanism.  I suggest inviting input from all 
members of the collaboration before having the Coordinating Committee 
discuss and vote on each such proposal.  This would allow us to make a 
decision on a relatively short time scale compared to trying to organize a 
vote of the entire collaboration.  If anyone objects to that mechanism, 
please present your view at tomorrow's meeting.

   In addition to discussing how (or if) we should endorse proposals, we 
should also have a discussion of the attached proposal and of the
SIDIS proposal recently circulated by Andrew Puckett, Nilanga Liyanage and 
Xiaodong Jiang.  Since the time frame is short, this must be a 
high priority item.

 	Thanks,
 	Brian

PS See Thia's attached note for list of known problems which will be fixed 
before the proposal is submitted.

-- 
Email: bquinn at cmu.edu         Physics Department
Phone: (412)-268-3523         Carnegie Mellon University
Fax: (412)-681-0648           Pittsburgh, PA, 15213    USA


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 23:38:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cynthia Keppel <keppel at jlab.org>
To: Brian Quinn <bquinn at cmu.edu>
Cc: Bogdan Wojtsekhowski <bogdanw at jlab.org>
Subject: TDIS proposal

Hi Brian,

Here is the latest version of the SBS TDIS proposal. It's still a work in 
progress, but should be OK in time for submission to this PAC and I think 
that anyone reading it can figure out what we're doing pretty well with 
this version. I have "The SBS Collaboration" listed as a collaborator :) 
but haven't really sent it out to the collaboration or EC yet for 
approval. If you think it's good enough at this point for consideration, 
please forward and maybe discuss at Wednesday's meeting?

If you do forward it, we encourage input. So that no one tires typing 
fingers with issues that are already known, here's the known "to do" list 
as of today still:
- notation in theory sections needs to be consistent
- actually, check for consistent notation everywhere (x vs. x_Bj, rTPC vs. RTPC, etc.)
- add discussion specific to deuterium running, constraints
- add in p vs t plot with RTPC resolution to show extrapolation possibility to the pole
- missing 2 figures in each of the fracture functions and background simulations sections
- further discussion of signal to background, explain light blue dotted line at 10^-4
- add pion SF projection plot to the results section
- add some discussion of DIS kinematics - x, Q^2, nu, table of what will be measured
- go through and edit as needed the new backgrounds section

Please advise.

Very best,
Thia
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: TDIS_proposal.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 3718104 bytes
Desc: 
Url : https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/sbs/attachments/20140527/378f87cc/attachment-0001.pdf