star-qaboard-l@lists.bnl.gov
Subject: STAR QA Board
List archive
- From: Benjamin Kimelman <bkimelman@ucdavis.edu>
- To: star-qaboard-l@lists.bnl.gov
- Subject: [STAR-QAboard] 26.5GeV FXT QA
- Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 16:51:39 -0700
Hi QA board,
Yesterday evening we had one run of 26.5GeV FXT data during CeC running. You can look at my QA for that one run here: https://www.star.bnl.gov/protected/lfsupc/bkimel/run20QA/AuAu_26p5GeV_FXT/day211/AuAu_26p5GeV_FXT_run_21211028_QA.pdf
There are a few things I want to point out:
- The vertexing algorithm was not adjusted for FXT (I'm guessing that Gene didn't know that we were going to take FXT data and didn't change the algorithm, but I only found out at the end of the run)
- On slides 7&8, the right column shows only tracks that have dE/dx<1. In 2019, we had seen an issue with a large number of tracks having dE/dx<1, which is why these QA plots exist. This seems to be a similar issue, although it appears that the particle bands in dE/dx are very wide. I cannot remember the cause of this, but I will look back through emails to identify that before we meet tomorrow.
- On slide 5, we can see shadow bands in the eToF 1/beta and mass distribution, which shows that it is not properly calibrated.
Ben Kimelman
Ph.D. Candidate, Nuclear Physics Group
UC Davis
He/him/his
-
[STAR-QAboard] 26.5GeV FXT QA,
Benjamin Kimelman, 07/30/2020
-
Re: [STAR-QAboard] 26.5GeV FXT QA,
Rosi Reed, 07/30/2020
-
Re: [STAR-QAboard] 26.5GeV FXT QA,
Benjamin Kimelman, 07/30/2020
-
Re: [STAR-QAboard] 26.5GeV FXT QA,
Van Buren, Gene, 07/30/2020
-
Re: [STAR-QAboard] 26.5GeV FXT QA,
Van Buren, Gene, 07/31/2020
- Re: [STAR-QAboard] 26.5GeV FXT QA, Ke, Hongwei, 07/31/2020
-
Re: [STAR-QAboard] 26.5GeV FXT QA,
Van Buren, Gene, 07/31/2020
-
Re: [STAR-QAboard] 26.5GeV FXT QA,
Van Buren, Gene, 07/30/2020
-
Re: [STAR-QAboard] 26.5GeV FXT QA,
Benjamin Kimelman, 07/30/2020
-
Re: [STAR-QAboard] 26.5GeV FXT QA,
Rosi Reed, 07/30/2020
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.