1.0 Data set and cuts

1. electrum run list
2. select trigger id 137641
3. standard definition of gamma candidate (3x3 cluster)
4. full EEMC acceptance

2.0 MC event sample

1. Pythia event sample (pibero's gamma trees) w/ proper weighting for partonic pT bins
2. Simple offline trigger simulation
3. full EEMC acceptance

3.0 Comparison of Data to MC in pT bins

• Left: MC gammas (black), MC jets (red), with common normalization
• Center: Data (black triangles), MC jet yield+gamma yield (red w/ error bars), gamma yield absolute normalization (black)
• Right: Same as center, except MC is red histogram 

Figure 3.3 -- Isolation ratio for 8 < pT < 12 GeV

Figure 3.4 -- Isolation ratio for 12 < pT < 20 GeV

 

4.0 Comparison of Data to MC in 3 sets of eta bins

• Left: MC gammas (black), MC jets (red), with common normalization
• Center: Data (black triangles), MC jet yield+gamma yield (red w/ error bars), gamma yield absolute normalization (black)
• Right: Same as center, except MC is red histogram  

Figure 4.1 -- Isolation ratio for etabins 1-4

 

Figure 4.2 -- Isolation ratio for etabins 5-8

Figure 4.3 -- Isolation ratio for etabins 9-12

5.0 Conclusions

 

1. The Monte Carlo reproduces the isolation ratio well, within the statistical precision of the MC sample
2. It is Isolation cut, data vs. MC, take 1 to get detailed agreement between data and MC, below 12 GeV.
3. From Checking the isolation cut vs pythia events, the rejection power of the isolation cut was comparable to the rejection power quoted in the endcap proposal.
4. Next we need to evaluate the rejection versus efficiency for the combined trigger + isolation cut / but this will be different from the  Checking the isolation cut vs pythia events only to the extent that the trigger shows inefficiencies for gamma identification.

1. Agreement between data and MC improved in the 8-12 GeV and 12-20 GeV bins.
2. Agreement about the same in the 5-6 GeV and 6-8 GeV bins.