September 13, 2017, Production & Analysis Working Group

From GlueXWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Meeting Time and Place

The meeting will be on Wednesday September 13, 2017 at 2:00 pm EDT. For those people at Jefferson Lab, the meeting will be in room F326.

Meeting Connections

  1. To join via a Web Browser, go to the page [1] https://bluejeans.com/115815824.
  2. To join via Polycom room system go to the IP Address: 199.48.152.152 (bjn.vc) and enter the meeting ID: 115815824.
  3. To join via phone, use one of the following numbers and the Conference ID: 115815824.
    • US or Canada: +1 408 740 7256 or
    • US or Canada: +1 888 240 2560
  4. More information on connecting to bluejeans is available.

Reconstruction & Analysis Studies Status

Agenda

  1. Announcements
  2. Data Production
  3. Analysis Focus
  4. This Week's Studies
  5. Any other studies
  6. Upcoming Study Schedule

This Week's Topics

  • Talks: Summary/overviews only. Detailed discussions should be held in the appropriate working groups.
  • Talks should be limited to 10 + 5 minutes.

Data Production

  1. Monitoring Update --- Thomas Britton
  2. Processing Update --- Alex Austregesilo
  3. Calibration Update --- Sean Dobbs
  4. Simulations Update --- Sean Dobbs

Simulation Reports

15 Minute summaries of progress and future plans on the 2017 mcsmear Workplan.

Analysis Focus: Total Cross Sections, Acceptance Corrections

  1. J/Ψ, φ --- Lubomir
  2. η, ρ, ω, φ --- Simon
  3. φ --- Thomas
  4. ω --- Cristiano
  5. Any others?

Studies: Alignment & Track/Shower Efficiencies

(i.e. Is the detector working?) Updates on experiment, simulation, and the comparison between the two.

  1. Drift chamber alignment --- Mike Staib, Alex Barnes
  2. Tracking Efficiencies --- Paul Mattione, Cristiano Fanelli
  3. BCAL Shower Efficiencies --- Elton Smith
  4. FCAL Shower Efficiencies --- Jon Zarling
    • Quick look at trigger simulation in channel omega->3pi

Upcoming Study Schedule

  • Updates on experiment, simulation, and the comparison between the two.
  • Summary/overviews only. Detailed discussions should be held in the appropriate working groups.
  • All talks should be limited to 10 + 5 minutes.

Next week: Miscellaneous Updates on experiment, simulation, and the comparison between the two.

  1. FCAL Shower Efficiencies --- Jon Zarling
  2. Track / Hit Matching: BCAL, FCAL, TOF, SC --- Paul Mattione, Simon
  3. Efficiencies: TOF, SC --- Beni, Mahmoud
  4. Means & Resolutions (time, energy, dE/dx): Tracking, BCAL, FCAL, SC, TOF
  5. Uncertainties: PID (BCAL, FCAL, TOF, dE/dx), Kinfit (BCAL, FCAL, tracking)
  6. Channel/Analysis Studies: Branching ratios, cross sections, SDMEs, beam asymmetries
  7. Other reconstruction/analysis issues

The week after next: Beamline & Triggering

  1. Flux --- Justin
  2. Beam energy --- Beamline Group
  3. Polarization (TPOL & lineshape) --- Beamline Group
  4. Beam Asymmetries --- Alex Austregesilo
  5. Trigger emulation --- Alex Somov
  6. Triggering efficiency --- Alex Somov

The following week: Hit Efficiencies (i.e. Is the detector working?) Updates on experiment, simulation, and the comparison between the two.

  1. CDC Hit Efficiencies --- Naomi Jarvis
  2. FDC Hit Efficiencies --- Alex Austregesilo
  3. BCAL Hit Efficiencies --- Elton Smith
  4. FCAL Hit Efficiencies --- Jon Zarling

Minutes

Data Production

  1. Monitoring Update --- Thomas: things still looking good
  2. Processing Update --- Alex A.: Sean requested another monitoring launch over 2017 data. It is ~50% completed.
  3. Calibration Update --- Sean checked in on the progress for updates for the next reconstruction launch.
    • Naomi and Will shall check in their updates by the end of the week to check in the next monitoring launch.
    • We need more people to look at their kinematic fitter outputs to determine how accurate the current fit errors are.
    • Paul: Add in Simon's improvements of track extrapolation
  4. Justin showed some slides trying to understand the π0 yield run dependence
    • Difference between 2016 and 2017 yields remains.
    • Looking at run-by-run variations shows that the last FCAL HV set leads to loss of showers at larger FCAL radii.
    • This is supported by an analysis using a fiducial cut that removes this region. A ~20% drop in the high rate data remains. Various systematic effects/studies were discussed.
    • Eugene: Should look at fully charged modes to see if there is a similar effect.
    • Matt: The HV changes were generally small, order of 10 V. The resulting gain changes were ~10-20%.
    • Alex A.: What is the loss in acceptance due to the fiducial cut. Justin: Numbers not on hand, maybe ~30%.
  5. Simulations Update --- Sean showed a few slides with an initial check of the trigger simulation.
    • First step is consistency check running the algorithm on data. Physics trigger generally close, BCAL-only trigger agrees within ~20%
    • Alex S.: Agrees with his previous studies, known problems with mode 7 data.
    • Working on more detailed checks, reweighing of bggen events.
    • Paul M.: Please check rates of events where both triggers are fired.
    • Will do another mini-launch once next round of trigger simulation updates are in and tested
    • Looked at some FCAL monitoring plots, Matt and Elton reminded to make sure that only physics triggers are used.


Analysis Focus: Total Cross Sections, Acceptance Corrections

  1. J/Ψ, φ --- Still trying to understand difference in rates, other studies very helpful.
  2. ρ --- Alex A. looked at rates of rho's in the 2017 data.
    • Looking at exclusive pi+pi- rate per 1k triggers in just the spectrometer, not much variation other than a kink near the start of high rate running.
    • Adding in tagger information and accidental subtraction successively makes a larger difference between high rate and low rate running.
    • Suggestion: look at microscope and hodoscope rates separately
    • Richard: Should use tagged flux in denominator.
  3. η' --- Marouen sees similar problems to other analyses in eta' -> eta pi+ pi- cross sections.

Studies: Alignment & Track/Shower Efficiencies

  1. Drift chamber alignment --- Need to decide the scope of this ongoing effort.
  2. Tracking Efficiencies --- Sean mentioned that Cris has been talking with him about how to understand the comparisons between data and MC that he is seeing, may be a reconstruction issue, may be a problem with the method. Paul agrees that measuring these are difficult.
  3. BCAL Shower Efficiencies --- Elton suggested that Will should give an update once the charged track reconstruction is in.
  4. FCAL Shower Efficiencies --- Jon showed an initial comparison of data and simulation for FCAL shower efficiencies using omega -> 3pi decays when the trigger simulation is included. Differences are seen, not entirely understood. Matt points out that a more accurate numerator is needed, the current method is too sensitive to backgrounds.