Run14 HFT NPE updates: DCAz and DCAxy fitting
1. Photonic electron reconstruction efficiency
- in pT < 3.5, (data unlike sign - like sign) / eff_PhE.  → 1st and 3rd plot in slide #3 are (data unlike sign - like sign) and 1/eff_PhE, respectively.
- in pT > 3.5, due to the limited statistics, HIJING*(data/HIJING ratio in 2.5 < pT < 3.5)/eff_PhE → 2nd plot in slide #3 is data/HIJING ratio.
- why eff_PhE is larger than 1 in slide #6 and 7?
- why empty bins in slide #7? and why DCAz uncertainty is larger than DCAxy?
- what is 2nd peak of data in 1st plot slide #3?

2. Template fitting
- total entries of DCAxy and DCAz distributions are same? In slide #23, the plot of Fit/data looks not same.
- in comparison between slide #26-28 and #21-25, the Fit/Data ratio look bad in slide #26-28. Maybe our assumption of photonic electron is wrong? HIJING corrected data to simulation ratio.
- in slide # 15, in 2 < pT < 2.5, b fraction is large difference almost 2 sigma? in slide #78, the fit results look ... bad...
- high hadron fraction - maybe constribution of prompt electrons? such as Jpsi? → Shenghui studied other prompt electron sources (Jpsi/inclusiveE , ...) in Au+Au collisions. Ask to Shenghui.

3. Slow Simulation with HIJING or embedding
- Large HIJING+Lc+ZB samples are produced - ask to Sooraj.
- some issue in reading MC MuDst: there is no StEvent information - ask again to Jason and cc Zhenyu and Xin ...

Discussions of inclusive NPE paper
- Run12 pp NPE analysis in high pT: Xiaozhi almost finished the analysis. Missing part is trigger bias study.
- Xiaozhi used TB ~ 0.6 from Run9 D0. From Shenghui's recent study, the TB is ~ 1.
- We need to recalculate XS with new TB.