[Sbs_gems] [EXTERNAL] Negative Pulse Analysis Update

[Andrew Puckett]

Interesting. One suggestion is that for your improved CM calculation, instead of taking +/- 3 sigma of the first iteration in your second step, you could do the first step the same way, and then take -5 sigma < ADC – mean from 1st step < +3 sigma, which might help remove some of the bias from positive signals.

Andrew

From: Sbs_gems <sbs_gems-bounces at jlab.org> on behalf of Sean Jeffas <sj9ry at virginia.edu>
Date: Friday, February 18, 2022 at 4:31 PM
To: Sbs_gems at jlab.org <sbs_gems at jlab.org>
Subject: [Sbs_gems] [EXTERNAL] Negative Pulse Analysis Update
Hi All,

I touched up my negative pulse analysis results that I showed to everyone last week. I realized I was making a serious mistake by simply cutting on signal > 80 ADC, because the first few strips in the APV always have large signals on them from the event header. Therefore this was significantly skewing my data. I am now using the correct method of cutting using 5*sigma of the pedestal noise, as is done in the tracking analysis.

Please see my new results in the following slides https://logbooks.jlab.org/files/2022/02/3984417/Neg_pulse_study_2_18_22.pdf. Also please take the time to look over all the plots in my log entry, https://logbooks.jlab.org/entry/3984417. I try my best to pick some event examples to show, but I encourage everyone to scroll through the event displays I have posted, to get an idea of what the negative pulses look like. Please let me know your thoughts and questions.

Best,
Sean
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/sbs_gems/attachments/20220218/b4d0b58e/attachment.html>