Dear Vitaliy,
The meaning of "Cerekov cuts was not valid" is:
when you analyze run 2306-2343 with Cerekov
Cuts:"ncl>-1"or"ncr>-1"(root -l show_ep_asym2.C 2306-2343),
charge is correct, but events after Cerekov cuts are zero.( I
believe Cerekov detector did not working well for some reason.)
Therefore, if you run show_ep_asym2.C all, charge summed over all
runs. But Yield summed all except run 2306-2343. So you can not get
correct asy.
You can try it. for example (root -l show_ep_asym2.C 2306). You
will fully understand what I mean.
Best regards,
Wang
2306-2343,
On Wed, 10 Sep 2003, vitaliy ziskin wrote:
> I beg to differ.
> First of all what do you mean "not valid". Secondly what is this cut
> (I>75), if it is a beam current than I don't think you are doing
> yourself a favor in making this cut. Also, if the cuts are invalid than
> the result should bear this out. As of now you are cutting out about a
> quarter of all events but excluding those runs. I still state that
> cerenkov do improve the result imensely (dil. of about 0.17), until
> proven otherwise.
>
> Cheers, Vitaliy
>
> Wang Xu wrote:
>
> >In Ben's previous email, He gave a summary of asy results with respect to
> >different cuts.
> >The conclusion we drawn from the results is that Cerekov cuts reduced a
> > large amount of background. However after I checked asy. run by run. I
> >realized the Cerekov cuts was not valid during run 2306-2343.The new
> >results (excluded run 2306-2343) are:
> >with Cerekov Cuts(I>75) left right
> >dilution(Pb*Pt):(asymwccut2.ps) 0.10 0.12
> >without Cerekov Cuts(I>75) left right
> >dilution(Pb*Pt):(asymwccut2.ps) 0.12 0.10.
> >Therefore the Cerekov cuts did not change Asy significantly. Overall Pb*Pt
> >is about 0.11.
> > Best regards,
> > Wang
> >
> >
> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Feb 24 2014 - 14:07:29 EST