- BEMC
- BEMC Detector Operator Manual
- Calibrations
- Database
- Hardware
- Mapping
- Service Tasks
- Software
- Useful Documents
- BTOF
- DAQ
- Detector Upgrades
- EEMC
- EPD
- ETOF
- FCS
- FGT
- FPD & FMS & FPS
- FTPC
- FTT
- HFT
- HLT
- L3
- MTD
- MTD NPS Maps
- PMD
- PP2PP
- RICH
- Roman Pot Phase II*
- Run-18 calibrations
- SSD
- SVT
- Slow Controls
- TPC
- TRG
- Trigger Detectors
- VPD
- test
Systematic Uncertainty Studies
Updated on Thu, 2007-07-12 12:33. Originally created by kocolosk on 2007-05-20 16:22.
In the 2003+2004 jet cross section and A_LL paper we quoted a 5% systematic uncertainty on the absolute BTOW calibration. For the 2005 jet A_LL paper there is some interest in reducing the size of this systematic.
I went back to the electron ntuple used to set the absolute gains and started making some additional plots. Here's an investigation of E_{tower} / p_{track} versus track momentum. I only included tracks passing directly through the center of the tower (R<0.003) where the correction from shower leakage is effectively zero.
Full set of electron cuts (overall momentum acceptance 1.5 < p < 20.):
dedx>3.5 && dedx<4.5 && status==1 && np>25 && adc>2*rms && r<0.003 && id<2401
I forgot to impose a vertex constraint on these posted plots, but when I did require |vz| < 30 the central values didn't really move at all.
Here are the individual slices in track momentum used to obtain the points on that plot:
Electrons with momentum up to 20 GeV were accepted in the original sample, but there are only ~300 of them above 6 GeV and the distribution is actually rather ugly. Integrating over the full momentum range yields a E/p measurement of 0.9978 +- 0.0023, but as you can see the contributions from invididual momentum slices scatter around 1.0 by as much as 4.5%
Next Steps? -- I'm thinking of slicing versus eta and maybe R (distance from center of tower).
I went back to the electron ntuple used to set the absolute gains and started making some additional plots. Here's an investigation of E_{tower} / p_{track} versus track momentum. I only included tracks passing directly through the center of the tower (R<0.003) where the correction from shower leakage is effectively zero.
Full set of electron cuts (overall momentum acceptance 1.5 < p < 20.):
dedx>3.5 && dedx<4.5 && status==1 && np>25 && adc>2*rms && r<0.003 && id<2401
I forgot to impose a vertex constraint on these posted plots, but when I did require |vz| < 30 the central values didn't really move at all.
Here are the individual slices in track momentum used to obtain the points on that plot:
Electrons with momentum up to 20 GeV were accepted in the original sample, but there are only ~300 of them above 6 GeV and the distribution is actually rather ugly. Integrating over the full momentum range yields a E/p measurement of 0.9978 +- 0.0023, but as you can see the contributions from invididual momentum slices scatter around 1.0 by as much as 4.5%
Next Steps? -- I'm thinking of slicing versus eta and maybe R (distance from center of tower).
»
- kocolosk's blog
- Printer-friendly version
- Login or register to post comments