Test of corrected EEMC geometry (bug 1618)

Monte-Carlo setup:

• One particle per event (photons, electrons, and pions)
• Full STAR 2006 geometry.
  In Kumac file: detp geom y2006g; gexec $STAR_LIB/geometry.so
• Flat in eta (1.08-2.0), phi (0,2pi), and pt (3-30 GeV)
• Using A2Emaker to get reconstructed Tower/SMD energy (no EEMC SlowSimulator in chain)
  what assumes fixed sampling fraction of 0.05 (5%)

Some definitions:

• Et correction factor : average p_T^thrown / E_T^{reco}.
  E_T^{reco} is the total energy in the Endcap Calorimeter (from A2Emaker)
• Sampling fraction: average 0.05 * Energy^{reco} / Energy^thrown.
• SMD energy: average energy in all strips fired (u-plane used for this post)
• Number of SMD strips fired: average total number of strips fired (u-plane used for this post)

Notations used in the plots:

• Left plots: no cAir fix
• Right plots: cAir-fixed
• Photons: black
• Electrons: red
• Pions: green

Et correction

Note: compare "Left" plots with Brians old results

Figure 1a: Et correction factor vs. pt thrown

Figure 1b: Et correction factor vs. eta thrown

Figure 1c: Et correction factor vs. phi thrown

Sampling fraction

Note: compare "Right" plots with Jason results with EEMC only geometry

Figure 2a: Sampling fraction vs. pt thrown

Figure 2b: Sampling fraction vs. energy thrown

Figure 2c: Sampling fraction vs. eta thrown

Figure 2d: Sampling fraction vs. phi thrown

SMD energy

Figure 3a: SMD energy vs. energy thrown

Figure 3b: SMD energy vs. eta thrown

Number of SMD strips fired

Figure 4a: Number of SMD strips fired vs. energy thrown

Figure 4b: Number of SMD strips fired vs. eta thrown