[Olympus] Draft agenda for OLYMPUS collaboration meeting
Jan C. Bernauer
bernauer at MIT.EDU
Tue Feb 25 16:05:30 EST 2014
Dear Michael,
Regarding the transition of Ozgur, it is most important that all of his
code is committed to the repo. I think he should concentrate on that
first. If there is some time left after that, we should see if we can
reproduce the same numbers.
Best,
Jan
On 2/25/14, 3:51 PM, Michael Kohl wrote:
> Dear Jan,
>
>> Ozgur is gone in a few days. If we want an independent check of the
>> stuff Brian did on the GEMs and MWPC efficiencies, this must happen at
>> DESY.
> Ozgur has seen the same efficiency patterns with his new code. I would
> suggest to look at the ratios of the efficiency histograms of Ozgur and
> Brian for each tracking element (using the identical binning).
>
> It will take some coordination between Ozgur and Brian but this should
> still be doable next week before the collaboration meeting and before
> Ozgur is moving on.
>
> Best regards
> Michael
>
>
> On Tue, 25 Feb 2014, Jan C. Bernauer wrote:
>
>> Hi Stan,
>>
>> If we would have more man power, you would be absolutely right, maybe
>> with the caveat of bias. But we don't, and I think that it takes away
>> time from the basic tasks. For a year of analysis, the number of green
>> marks is not really high.
>>
>> Why invest time in a study of charge asymmetries, when the MC is not
>> fully tested and understood? When the efficiency maps are not verified?
>> When the basic cluster finding code on the GEMs will likely change? It's
>> not so much the time writing the needed tools to study beam asymmetries
>> - this can then later be reused and run again with the rest updated.
>> But we will spend time analyzing the results, chasing ghosts. And then,
>> we might come to the wrong conclusions.
>>
>> For the Symmetric Moeller, the beam position is crucial. It's likely
>> that we a good calibration for that soon. But I'd like to see that the
>> simulation replicates the behavior of our beam scan, in scale and
>> position, before it's worthwhile to look at runs over time.
>>
>> Ozgur is gone in a few days. If we want an independent check of the
>> stuff Brian did on the GEMs and MWPC efficiencies, this must happen at
>> DESY.
>>
>> Best,
>> Jan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2/25/14, 6:44 AM, Belostotski, Stanislav wrote:
>>> Hi, Jan,
>>> I am afraid as wrongly understood.
>>> Yes ,we are far from sort of final conclusions.
>>> Yet the lumi study must finally have a goal.
>>> If one may say anything about possible beam charge asymmetries,
>>> even at the level of estimations right now, what would be harm from that?
>>> That is a critical issue for the whole experiments.
>>> Or you think this is still premature?
>>> With best regards StanB
>>>
>>> On 25.02.2014 12:07, Jan C. Bernauer wrote:
>>>> Dear Stan,
>>>>
>>>>> From what I learned from Juergens nice presentation, I can only warn
>>>> against this. We need to learn to walk before we can run, and frankly,
>>>> in some sense we haven't even discovered that we have feet yet.
>>>>
>>>> We often discuss high level plots in the past - but then we discover
>>>> that there are so many caveats how they are produced that we can not
>>>> extract anything from it.
>>>>
>>>> I can only recommend that we go through the list of basics and work on
>>>> them point-by-point. The MWPC is arguably in better shape there, but
>>>> there also 12-deg-system wide things to do first. For example, it would
>>>> be great if finally could get a matching set of efficiencies, with the
>>>> same numbers, by two different people. And offsets, resolutions, etc.
>>>>
>>>> One additional point: We already hat the unfortunate incident that the
>>>> first look on lumi data provided great results, which then later turned
>>>> out to be accidental. This put us in a bad situation with the PRC,
>>>> something I wouldn't like to repeat.
>>>> It's also very easy to bias oneself looking at such plots.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Jan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2/25/14, 4:59 AM, Belostotski, Stanislav wrote:
>>>>> Dear Douglas,
>>>>> I would like to comment on Wednesday Luminosity meeting.
>>>>
>>>>> First, it must be some time slot for lunch indicated in the agenda.
>>>>> In the luminosity discussion section, I find that lumi studies are
>>>>> already now developed enough for focusing on two most important for
>>>>> the final analysis items:
>>>>> 1. Obtaining a coherent result on luminosity using both SYMB and 12 deg
>>>>> monitor;
>>>>> 2.Possible sources of false beam charge asymmetry affecting the
>>>>> luminosity monitoring.
>>>>> With best regards
>>>>>
>>>>> On 24.02.2014 17:56, Douglas Kenneth Hasell wrote:
>>>>>> Dear Colleagues,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Attached is the draft agenda for the OLYMPUS collaboration meeting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The meeting will be held in the afternoon Monday and Tuesday, March 10-11, 2014 so people in the USA can easily participate.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you have a title or description for the topic please send it to me so I can update the agenda.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> J?rgen will give a talk on OLYMPUS at the DPG meeting the week after the collaboration meeting so please prepare high-quality slides reflecting the most recent results so he can incorporate them into his presentation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The proposal for the Wednesday, March 12, workshop on luminosity is to have a coordinator (Michael or J?rgen) summarise our current status, list the areas requiring work, and then lead the discussion on the work to be done, who will do it, etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Douglas
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 26-415 M.I.T. Tel: +1 (617) 258-7199
>>>>>> 77 Massachusetts Avenue Fax: +1 (617) 258-5440
>>>>>> Cambridge, MA 02139, USA E-mail: hasell at mit.edu
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>>>>> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>>>>>> Name: Agenda.pdf
>>>>>> Type: application/pdf
>>>>>> Size: 70014 bytes
>>>>>> Desc: not available
>>>>>> Url : http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/olympus/attachments/20140224/f60b11df/attachment.pdf
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Jan C. Bernauer
>> Massachusetts Institute of Technology
>> 77 Massachusetts Ave, Room 26-441
>> Cambridge, MA, 02139, USA
>> Phone: (617) 253-6580
>> _______________________________________________
>> Olympus mailing list
>> Olympus at mit.edu
>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>>
>
> +---------------------------------------------------------------------
> | Dr. Michael Kohl, Associate 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
>
--
Dr. Jan C. Bernauer
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
77 Massachusetts Ave, Room 26-441
Cambridge, MA, 02139, USA
Phone: (617) 253-6580
More information about the Olympus
mailing list