<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi Sean, <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Yes I just found it and I am using it to make some basic plots
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Kondo<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> Sean Jeffas <sj9ry@virginia.edu> <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, January 23, 2022 11:47 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Gnanvo, Kondo (kg6cq) <kg6cq@virginia.edu><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Andrew Puckett <puckett@jlab.org>; Sbs_gems@jlab.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Sbs_gems] [EXTERNAL] Question on pedestal plots<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi Kondo,<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I'm not sure if you found this, but I made a log post with the GEM study, which will be most useful to you.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://logbooks.jlab.org/entry/3975518">https://logbooks.jlab.org/entry/3975518</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Best,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Sean<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 11:34 AM Gnanvo, Kondo (kg6cq) <<a href="mailto:kg6cq@virginia.edu">kg6cq@virginia.edu</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Hi again Andrew,
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I just quickly looked at the GEM studies with beam current from yesterday and it seems that the sag is indeed correlated to the beam current. I will try to get some preliminary
plots on that shortly <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Best regards
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Kondo<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b>From:</b> Andrew Puckett <<a href="mailto:puckett@jlab.org" target="_blank">puckett@jlab.org</a>>
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, January 22, 2022 7:28 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Gnanvo, Kondo (kg6cq) <<a href="mailto:kg6cq@virginia.edu" target="_blank">kg6cq@virginia.edu</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:Sbs_gems@jlab.org" target="_blank">Sbs_gems@jlab.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [EXTERNAL] Question on pedestal plots<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Hi Kondo, We’ve seen this phenomenon since the beginning of the experiment, it was worse for high Q2 kinematics. The negative sag of the common mode for either method is attributable
to the wrong polarity fluctuations. The difference between Danning and sorting method calculations is something we’ve also seen from the beginning. The Danning method as implemented offline is subject to more downside bias as a result of this compared to the
sorting method. I suppose if we see a larger difference in some modules it could affect the efficiency, but is hopefully correctable in software.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt">Andrew<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__puckett.physics.uconn.edu&d=DwMGaQ&c=CJqEzB1piLOyyvZjb8YUQw&r=IY9rjQPVeUBORHn2z0jGy7U2Cc-U0-dYM3Rqg9Kcgwk&m=JHBUxZE9pxZXCa8dgcW0fU7FsjJtXAey6MSmk8uzKW4EAR0ce4K8VA9B5Ed_vvkZ&s=cg-SiV_vsFq13SYFKKw8QHbw_Rh9XhbeAw1tRiif-s8&e=" target="_blank">puckett.physics.uconn.edu</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt">On Jan 22, 2022, at 6:58 PM, Gnanvo, Kondo (kg6cq) <<a href="mailto:kg6cq@virginia.edu" target="_blank">kg6cq@virginia.edu</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Hi Andrew,
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I was looking at some pedestal plots and I noticed two things,
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">1-) The difference between sorting and Danning method has this curve-like shape for the U-V strip layer that is not seen for the X-Y layers and the difference is quite significant
compare to the common mode fluctuation itself. I looked at some earlier plots (run 13394) when we had all 4 U-V layers as well as the most recent one and it seems quite consistent.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><a href="https://logbooks.jlab.org/files/2022/01/3975625/summaryPlots_13455_BBGEM_ped_and_commonmode_50k_printme.pdf" target="_blank">https://logbooks.jlab.org/files/2022/01/3975625/summaryPlots_13455_BBGEM_ped_and_commonmode_50k_printme.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><a href="https://logbooks.jlab.org/files/2022/01/3974078/summaryPlots_13394_BBGEM_ped_and_commonmode_50k_printme.pdf" target="_blank">https://logbooks.jlab.org/files/2022/01/3974078/summaryPlots_13394_BBGEM_ped_and_commonmode_50k_printme.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">2-) I also see for the V stripe of layer#1, the difference is more pronounced and I am thinking this might partly explain the lower efficiency we are seeing with this layer<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I was wondering if there is any explanation for the discrepancy. Maybe there is something here that we can learn something from<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Best regards
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Kondo<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">_______________________________________________<br>
Sbs_gems mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Sbs_gems@jlab.org" target="_blank">Sbs_gems@jlab.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/sbs_gems" target="_blank">https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/sbs_gems</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>