Star-fst-l mailing list

["Visser, Gerard" <gvisser AT indiana.edu>]

hi Ziyue,

    Great, thanks! I think your plots will certainly give everyone all they need to contemplate if there's a problem. My own opinion at the moment is that things are probably working fine.

    Until when do you & Zhenyu think that we continue 9-tb running. [If you expect this needs discussion in 10AM meeting tomorrow, I could join. But for now I figure that's not the plan.] If the deadtime doesn't hurt too much, keeping this going to monday makes sense to me.

    I will be completely unavailable from tuesday ~3PM til wednesday ~8AM.

         Gerard

---

From: Ziyue Zhang <zzhan70 AT uic.edu>
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2023 4:29 PM
To: Visser, Gerard <gvisser AT indiana.edu>
Cc: Landgraf, Jeffery M. <jml AT bnl.gov>; Videbaek, Flemming <videbaek AT bnl.gov>; L Star-fst <star-fst-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Subject: Re: [Star-fst-l] FST with 9 Time Bins Diagnostic

 

Hello Gerard,

I've already had the 9 time bin plots , but after discussion with Zhenyu, I need to make some adjustments:

1. I did not exclude bin 0-1; we decided to exclude bin 0-1 and 8, as the obvious reason you suggested

2. Calculate the following fractions: bin 3, bin 4 and bin 5's fraction among bin 2-7. This should correspond to the fraction of bin 0,1,2 's (3 tb setup) fraction in the entire signal 

3. Plus additional value: mean of the tb distribution; total entries of the distribution (both exclude bin 0,1,8)

Jeff has helped me set up the working machinery on the online farm.

I'll get the latest plots before tomorrow's 10 am meeting. In the attachment is a sample plot for the 3 tb running period, with additional 15 runs (100->115) compared to last plots I showed.

Ziyue

On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 2:50 PM Visser, Gerard <gvisser AT indiana.edu> wrote:

Hi Ziyue,

      I understand there were problems with the way you had generated your nice plots before... Is there a feasible correct way to make such plots? I think it would be very interesting to have this to see the stability or instability of which is the max timebin in the current 9-timebin running.

     Because of the sorta-known wrong trigger timing issue, doing your plots both ways where you consider all 9 timebins and where you simply exclude the first two timebins from your analysis and only look at the last 7, may be good.  [BTW note that if wrong-trigger timing issue is variable, that is a source of variation in which is max timebin of three, at least a source of variation between 1^st and 2nd, and potentially contributes to the thing we've been worrying about.]

    I suppose we should try to decide soon when we have had enough of the 9-tb data and will switch back.

    Switching back is best done during any planned 45 minute no-collisions opportunity, when there will be someone experienced in the control room to correctly set the busy parameter back.

    It's debatable but 6 timebin (or 5 but the deadtime is same as with 6) is also possible. For such I would need to prepare firmware, but it's feasible.

    Sincerely,

       Gerard