Aron,
Actualy, I had the opposite Q^2 dependence with higher dilution being at
lower Q^2. I attributed it to higher background at higher momentum
transfer. Let's get together next week and resolve this.
Vitaliy
Aaron Joseph Maschinot wrote:
>at yesterday's meeting, it was mentionned that vitaliy had (a while ago)
>reported that the d(e,e'p) beam-vector dilution seemed to have a Q2
>dependence. i looked into this a little more, and there does indeed
>appear to be such a dependence (see attached plot).
>
>to determine the dilution, i tried two different cuts: 1) all good events
>with missing momentum less than 0.1GeV and 2) all good events with missing
>momentum less than 0.15GeV. theoretically, the limit at pM = 0 will give
>you the dilution (and thus the polarization), but there is very little
>model dependence up to 0.15GeV, so the two sets of results should
>basically agree.
>
>dilution seems to rise with Q2. way too much. theoretically, the
>dilution should be independent of Q2. possibly the variations in the
>field along the extended target convoluted with BLAST's non-4-pi
>acceptance somehow produces such a Q2 dependence. don't know; gotta think
>more about this.
>
>aaron
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Feb 24 2014 - 14:07:31 EST