sphenix-emcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: sPHENIX EMCal discussion
List archive
- From: "Bailey, Virginia Ruth" <vbailey2 AT illinois.edu>
- To: Megan Connors <meganEconnors AT gmail.com>
- Cc: "sphenix-emcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov" <sphenix-emcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
- Subject: Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] Second energy scan analysis
- Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 18:04:45 +0000
Hi Megan,
Yes, you are correct that the points that do not fit have low statistics. We are looking into using different runs or possibly combining runs in order to increase our statistics for the lower energy points. We also plan to look at each run individually
to make sure the runs we are currently using match the rest of the data.
Best,
Virginia
Best,
-Megan
From: mjuszkie AT gmail.com [mjuszkie AT gmail.com] on behalf of Megan Connors [meganEconnors AT gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 12:50 PM
To: Bailey, Virginia Ruth
Cc: sphenix-emcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] Second energy scan analysis
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 12:50 PM
To: Bailey, Virginia Ruth
Cc: sphenix-emcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] Second energy scan analysis
Hi Virginia,
Very nice work!I was wondering if you have any ideas why the black points are less smooth. I don't know what the chi^2 was for the preliminary analysis but it looks like it would be much better than your 26/6. It seems the points that don't follow the fit so nicely have
worse statistics but systematically give a poorer resolution. Is this the source of the issue? Any possible improvements?
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Bailey, Virginia Ruth
<vbailey2 AT illinois.edu> wrote:
Hello all,
We have put together a comparison of the UIUC analysis second energy scan data with that of the preliminary analysis. Currently we are using MIP calibration data, but we plan to switch to e-shower calibration when it is available. For the preliminary analysis, the resolution decreased with the switch to the e-shower calibration. Our current analysis gives data that is very close the the preliminary e-shower data, so the question is do we expect a similar resolution improvement with the new e-shower calibrations or is the resolution as good as it will get (as the preliminary e-shower calibration data was already very close to simulation data)?
Best,Virginia
_______________________________________________
Sphenix-emcal-l mailing list
Sphenix-emcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-emcal-l
-
[Sphenix-emcal-l] Second energy scan analysis,
Bailey, Virginia Ruth, 07/21/2016
-
Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] Second energy scan analysis,
Huang, Jin, 07/21/2016
- Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] Second energy scan analysis, Bailey, Virginia Ruth, 07/21/2016
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
-
Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] Second energy scan analysis,
Megan Connors, 07/21/2016
- Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] Second energy scan analysis, Bailey, Virginia Ruth, 07/21/2016
-
Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] Second energy scan analysis,
Huang, Jin, 07/21/2016
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.