sPHENIX EMCal discussion

[John Haggerty <haggerty AT bnl.gov>]

Joe,

Very nice work.  For the next round of the CDR, I'm thinking you could 
contribute these plots:

1) Resolution with "ideal" light collection
2) Uncorrected resolution with position dependent light collection
3) Position corrected resolution
4) Position corrected resolution with some random channel-to-channel 
"calibration" errors

I think you have the first three, which would look handsome on 2x2 
canvases, one for e+, one for e-, one for photons.  Does that sound like 
a good idea?

Also, another thing we have to revise is the discussion of sampling 
fraction; it used to be 2.4%, but I think it is more like 2% now, and 
I'm not quite sure how it varies in eta.

On 5/31/17 9:11 AM, Joe Osborn wrote:
> Dear EMCalers,
>
> Following Jin's suggestion, I implemented a leading order position 
> dependent recalibration on the energy response for photons, electrons, 
> and positrons. The results are attached in this email.
>
> Please note that the "before recalibration" plots are not the exact same 
> as what I sent before as I was inadvertently only using 10% of the 
> simulation that Chris produced (whoops). The results here are using the 
> entire single particle production. The position dependent recalibration 
> reduces the constant term by 1-2% for each eta bin.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Joe Osborn
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Joe Osborn
> Ph.D Candidate
> University of Michigan
> jdosbo AT umich.edu <mailto:jdosbo AT umich.edu>
> (859) 433-8738
>
> On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Joe Osborn <jdosbo AT umich.edu 
> <mailto:jdosbo AT umich.edu>> wrote:
>
>     Hi John,
>
>     Chris sent a couple of emails out to the software lists, but I guess
>     not the other lists. It might be too late as the BBQ might already
>     be fired up, but for anyone who wants to take a look the G4 hits
>     files are located in the following directory:
>
>     /sphenix/data/data02/review_2017-08-02/
>
>     Joe
>
>
>
>     ---------------------------------------
>
>     Joe Osborn
>     Ph.D Candidate
>     University of Michigan
>     jdosbo AT umich.edu <mailto:jdosbo AT umich.edu>
>     (859) 433-8738 <tel:(859)%20433-8738>
>
>     On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 4:04 PM, John Haggerty <haggerty AT bnl.gov
>     <mailto:haggerty AT bnl.gov>> wrote:
>
>         Joe,
>
>         Thanks to Joe, Jin, and Chris for these results.  There is
>         obviously some bouncy behavior that seems a little odd, but I
>         know that even in very simple cases, getting "the resolution" at
>         the few percent level is not as simple as it sounds.
>
>         Just to be clear--this is with the right detector material
>         budget in front of the EMCAL, all events from (0,0,0), and
>         Sean's light collection map in every tower?
>
>         Probably as you say nobody's going to have time between the
>         barbecue this weekend and the upcoming barbecues at the lab, but
>         you might ask Chris to post their location to the wiki and the
>         emcal and hcal lists.
>
>         On 5/26/17 3:37 PM, Joe Osborn wrote:
>
>             Dear EMCalers,
>
>             As Jin presented in the simulations/EMCal meeting this week,
>             he has updated the EMCal simulations with the tower tilting
>             in azimuth and polar directions, amongst other changes. With
>             the simulations code tagged, Chris produced single particle
>             simulations that people can play with before we start
>             producing large batches of simulations.
>
>             Attached are the resolution of the EMCal for photons,
>             electrons, and positrons in several different eta bins. Just
>             to be clear, the single particles were thrown for 9
>             different energies in the four different eta regions
>             surrounding the values quoted in my plots (i.e. eta=0
>             corresponds to truth particles being thrown in +/-0.05 units
>             of pseudorapidity around 0, same for eta=0.3,0.6, and 0.9).
>
>             Any comments would be great, or perhaps everyone will be too
>             busy enjoying the long weekend in which case we can also
>             discuss them at the EMCal meeting next week.
>
>             Thanks,
>
>             Joe
>
>             ---------------------------------------
>
>             Joe Osborn
>             Ph.D Candidate
>             University of Michigan
>             jdosbo AT umich.edu <mailto:jdosbo AT umich.edu>
>             <mailto:jdosbo AT umich.edu <mailto:jdosbo AT umich.edu>>
>             (859) 433-8738 <tel:%28859%29%20433-8738>
>
>
>             _______________________________________________
>             sPHENIX-EMCal-l mailing list
>             sPHENIX-EMCal-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>             <mailto:sPHENIX-EMCal-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
>             https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-emcal-l
>             <https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-emcal-l>
>
>
>
>         -- 
>         John Haggerty
>         email: haggerty AT bnl.gov <mailto:haggerty AT bnl.gov>
>         cell: 631 741 3358 <tel:631%20741%203358>
>         _______________________________________________
>         sPHENIX-EMCal-l mailing list
>         sPHENIX-EMCal-l AT lists.bnl.gov <mailto:sPHENIX-EMCal-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
>         https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-emcal-l
>         <https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-emcal-l>


--
John Haggerty
email: haggerty AT bnl.gov
cell: 631 741 3358