Difference between revisions of "Optics Meeting May 17 2022 230PM ET"
From Moller Wiki
(Created page with "Back to Main Page >> Optics Meetings >> following meeting >> Optics_Meeting_May_10_2022_230PM...") |
(→Minutes) |
||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
=Agenda= | =Agenda= | ||
| − | #Optics Matrix Updates (Vassu) [https://moller.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/File: | + | #Optics Matrix Updates (Vassu) [https://moller.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/File:MOLLER_OPTICS_UPDATE.pdf] |
=Attendance= | =Attendance= | ||
| − | + | David, Bill, Zuhal, Kate, Vassu, Ciprian, Chandan | |
=Minutes= | =Minutes= | ||
| + | *Vassu's results: Linear Correlation matrices (Pearson method) generally match what we expect, except that target z-vertex seems not correlated with much else: that may be because we are looking at single thin 12C target for these data (and only one beam energy). | ||
| + | *Very little correlates with target_p. Small correaltions with r, r'. Again, may be due to one target foil, one beam energy only. | ||
| + | *Similar with non-linear correlations (Spearman correlations) for theta-target, but now seem big correlations for target_p with r and r'. | ||
| + | *-For theta_tg, the residuals plots look good for a simple 2-parameter dependence (r, r'); adding phi and phi' does not make residuals narrower, and in fact seems to introduce a bias to the mean residual. Maybe 2-parameter is enough. | ||
| + | *For phi_tgt, the residual plots look good for a two-parameter (phi. phi') fit, but get narrower if go to all 4 GEM parameters, and probably still an unbiased mean value. Of course, phi_tgt is not the most important variable for us to reconstruct. | ||
| + | *Including 3 different beam energies (1,2, and 3 pass), still one target: target_vz is still uncorrelated, but now linear correlations are clear for target-p with r and r'. | ||
| + | *Target_vz fitting seems to only work if we fit to just one hole. | ||
| + | *To do (David) - how sensitive is our asymmetry kinematic factor to target_vz? | ||
=Meeting link information= | =Meeting link information= | ||
Latest revision as of 15:03, 24 May 2022
Back to Main Page >> Optics Meetings
Contents
[hide]Agenda
- Optics Matrix Updates (Vassu) [1]
Attendance
David, Bill, Zuhal, Kate, Vassu, Ciprian, Chandan
Minutes
- Vassu's results: Linear Correlation matrices (Pearson method) generally match what we expect, except that target z-vertex seems not correlated with much else: that may be because we are looking at single thin 12C target for these data (and only one beam energy).
- Very little correlates with target_p. Small correaltions with r, r'. Again, may be due to one target foil, one beam energy only.
- Similar with non-linear correlations (Spearman correlations) for theta-target, but now seem big correlations for target_p with r and r'.
- -For theta_tg, the residuals plots look good for a simple 2-parameter dependence (r, r'); adding phi and phi' does not make residuals narrower, and in fact seems to introduce a bias to the mean residual. Maybe 2-parameter is enough.
- For phi_tgt, the residual plots look good for a two-parameter (phi. phi') fit, but get narrower if go to all 4 GEM parameters, and probably still an unbiased mean value. Of course, phi_tgt is not the most important variable for us to reconstruct.
- Including 3 different beam energies (1,2, and 3 pass), still one target: target_vz is still uncorrelated, but now linear correlations are clear for target-p with r and r'.
- Target_vz fitting seems to only work if we fit to just one hole.
- To do (David) - how sensitive is our asymmetry kinematic factor to target_vz?
Meeting link information
Meeting URL
https://cwm.zoom.us/j/97259755403?pwd=WTRqVHJnZ3RQa1IwNHdMQjJuQm9FZz09
Meeting ID: 972 5975 5403
Passcode: 4937
Return to Optics Meetings
Return to Main Page
