[Olympus] Acceptance Simulations

[Norair Akopov]

Dear Jan,

Well, if you still suppose that the TOF efficiencies can change on the 
order of magnitude, then the first our task should be just to make 
systematic monitoring, even with the plugin I poduced and you improved
with more properly implemented 1L1R condition which of course still 
includes some noice reflection on the efficiency definition. Nevertheless 
as I know with such plugin we obtained around 80% with similar bar-to-bar 
pattern left and right. Then your statement "order of magnitude change" 
means that we should see with this plugin sometimes drop of the 
efficiencies for some of ToF bars up to tens percent? Is it really so? If 
yes, what we are measuring at all?


I agree that we all should think, but also I would mention that we should 
not simulate the conditions we do not see in fact.

Best,
Norik



  On Thu, 15 Nov 2012, Jan C. 
Bernauer wrote:

> Dear Norik,
>
>
>  as you know, we had to repair several ToFs after the last run. Their
> reduction in efficiency was certainly in that order of magnitude, if not
> larger, so I would say this test is very reasonable.
>
> If we see a large dependence of these tests on the magnetic field, we
> should consider running with two or three field settings. This may then
> allow us to tune the simulation later on.
>
> We should all think about measurements we can do to have enough
> redundant information to understand our detector and tune or simulation.
>
> Best,
> Jan
>
>
>
> On 15.11.12 12:28, Norair Akopov wrote:
>>
>> Dear Stan,
>>
>> I would not spend a time for quite unrealistic simulation, as you know
>> the old measurements with the cosmic as well the lates done with the SiPM
>> sandwiches with the beam have given ~99% efficiency. It means the
>> relaistic level of time dependence for the TOF efficiencies could be on
>> the level of max. 1-2% (even less), but not 20%? If you want to simulate
>> the extremely worse situation , then the forward and backward bars has to
>> differ on 1-2% efficiency.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Norik
>>      On Thu, 15 Nov 2012, Belostotski, Stanislav wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Axel, I suggest a simple test: assume that one  forward and one
>>> backward  TOF bar has lost its efficiency by some 20%. How the ratio at
>>> corresponding scattering angles would look like.
>>> Regards StanB
>>>
>>> On 14.11.2012 20:36, Axel Schmidt wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I've analyzed another chunk of data, enough to double the statistics.  I'm attaching an updated version of my last plot.  There are definitely features that appear with the 1-degree binning.
>>>>
>>>> I agree, a generator that is uniform in lepton scattering angle is needed to study this further.  I'm working on producing that data now.  The advantage of the realistic generator is that I had that data lying around already; it was quicker to analyze.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Axel
>>>>
>>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>>> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>>>> Name: tof_gaps.pdf
>>>> Type: application/pdf
>>>> Size: 69777 bytes
>>>> Desc: not available
>>>> Url : http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/olympus/attachments/20121114/792684e1/attachment.pdf
>>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Nov 14, 2012, at 12:07 PM, Michael Kohl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Axel,
>>>>> this looks good. On first sight, the acceptance changes are small.
>>>>> One needs much more statistics at backward angle. Maybe use a white generator with weights rather that cross-section distributed events.
>>>>>
>>>>> For the comparison of gap vs no gap, one would need to look at ratios of ratios.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks and best regards
>>>>>    Michael
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 14 Nov 2012, Axel Schmidt wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Michael,
>>>>>> 	Here are plots showing the effect of introducing gaps between the tof bars (B+ mode only).  I show two different binning schemes side by side.
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Axel
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> +---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> | Dr. Michael Kohl, Assistant Professor and Staff Research Scientist
>>>>> | Physics Department, Hampton University, Hampton, VA 23668
>>>>> | Jefferson Lab, C117, 12000 Jefferson Avenue, Newport News, VA 23606
>>>>> | Phone: +1-757-727-5153 (HU), +1-757-269-7343 (Jlab)
>>>>> | Fax:   +1-757-728-6910 (HU), +1-757-269-7363 (Jlab)
>>>>> | Email: kohlm at jlab.org
>>>>> | Cell:  +1-757-256-5122 (USA)
>>>>> |
>>>>> | Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Bd. 66, Rm. 6,
>>>>> | Phone: +49-40-8998-6406, Cell: +49-171-101-1967
>>>>> +---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Olympus mailing list
>>>> Olympus at mit.edu
>>>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Olympus mailing list
>>> Olympus at mit.edu
>>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Olympus mailing list
>> Olympus at mit.edu
>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Olympus mailing list
> Olympus at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>