Hi ben, jason
thanks for the good work and extensive update. I think it is good
progress but needs to be pushed a bit forward. Comments:
_ For the beam current dependent asymmetries: it'd be surprising
that we have different L/R results only at low current. I am sure
you checked that the same cuts are used l/r. But are there any other
differences ?? Are the yields & their distributions the same ? This
you can easily check "by hand", using the integrated charge for I<75..
(you have the charge files)
_ For af dependent asymmetries: if I exclude the 3rd data point
on the three bottom panel then I can hardly conclude anything. It may
point to a problem in data/analysis/af-measurament local to that time.
It may be worth while to look for possible problems there. You can
easily add a "yields" plot right ?
I agree with extirpating the "bad" fills although I have no solution on
how to find/cut them (except by hand..). We have to first understand if
they really make an impact, since we are dealing with few events and they
seem nicely distributed (by eye).
Also about the AF correlation: you take the low-Q2 bin as the "asymmetry
value". I think it is more logical to take the dilution factors proper,
with their error bar. These can be calculated in the same loop that
calculates the chi2 in show_ep_asym2.C and are the only "junk" indicator
we have. The sum L+R dilution factor can be just the average weighted
by 1/errbars2
Sorry to bother you, have fun!
-- tancredi
________________________________________________________________________________
Tancredi Botto, phone: +1-617-253-9204 mobile: +1-978-490-4124
research scientist MIT/Bates, 21 Manning Av Middleton MA, 01949
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Feb 24 2014 - 14:07:29 EST