Minutes of the E00-102 Meeting Tuesday, September 26 2006 Fissum KF/KF/SG/JH/JL/AS/JU/LW o JH began by presenting a talk entitled "Study of a quasielastic 16O(e,e'p) experiment combining a Monte Carlo with a RDWIA code" which was an overview of the MCEEP work performed in Lund during the summer. The talk may be downloaded from: http://www.jlab.org/~fissum/e00102/figsetc/wg/sept2006_herraiz.pdf I will not summarize JH's talk here, but rather point you to the document he prepared describing his work and the results. A draft version this report to the E00-102 working group may be downloaded from: http://www.jlab.org/~fissum/e00102/analysis/mceep39_e89003.pdf LW will give the report a last proofread a s a p before we submit it as a Hall A Technote. Once it is registered as a technote, JH will make a blanket mailing of its availability to the Collaboration. We anticipate that a toolkit allowing for quantifiable studies of extended acceptance effects will be useful to other groups. o JL then presented a talk entitled "Status of ROOT-based analyzer for E00-102" which was an overview of the progress made since the last analysis meeting in understanding the differences between the ESPACE and ROOT-based analyses. The talk may be downloaded from: http://www.jlab.org/~fissum/e00102/figsetc/wg/sept2006_lachniet.pdf I will not get into the details of JL's talk here, but he has identified and solved problems involving systematic shifts in TRANSPORT coordinates, extended-target corrections, energyloss, and coincidence timing, to name a few. See also the list of outstanding issues at the bottom of this message. o Foe finished up the talks by presenting his own entitled "Status of Analysis for E00-102" which detailed his investigations of electron-proton correlations for both seive slit and open data runs. The talk may be downloaded from: http://www.jlab.org/~fissum/e00102/figsetc/wg/sept2006_foe.pdf Foe is focusing on the basics as he gets up to speed with the analysis. o Fissum presented a quick overview of the discussions he had with Konrad Aniol on the weekend regarding the GEANT-based model of the target (which extends to the downstream side of the spectrometer collimators). Konrad has made substantial progress, but has bogged down due to lack of information regarding the geometry of the waterfoil/canister/chamber system. Fissum will track down the information and post it. BEGIN FOLLOWUP: Dave Meekins provided the following drawings: http://www.jlab.org/~fissum/e00102/target/scattering_chamber.pdf http://www.jlab.org/~fissum/e00102/target/target_cell.pdf Thanks, Dave! If there are any further questions as to the geometry of our target, Dave has agreed to help us track down the answers. END FOLLOWUP o JL pointed out the needed for better communication between those analyzing now that we are seriously examining the data again. As modifications are continually being made to the analyzer, a CVS archive is probably appropriate. JL will investigate. BEGIN FOLLOWUP: JL has set up a CVS archive for E00-102: Here are his instructions: The modified analyzer can be checked out on a Jlab CUE machine by taking the following steps: 1) setenv CVSROOT /home/lachniet/oxycvs 2) cd to the directory you want to build the analyzer in 3) cvs co analyzer 4) cvs co e00102_db 5) cvs co e00102_scripts Note that you will need to modify your .cshrc (or equivalent) file: setenv LD_LIBRARY_PATH ${LD_LIBRARY_PATH}:ANA_DIR setenv DB_DIR ANA_DIR/e00102_db set PATH ${PATH}:ANA_DIR/analyzer where ANA_DIR is the directory from which the "cvs co" commands were issued. Then go to ANA_DIR/analyzer and type "make". For instructions on how to run the analyzer, see: http://hallaweb.jlab.org/root/index.html END FOLLOWUP o some outstanding issues were discussed. These included the fact that the analyzer is not applying the extended target corrections properly, and that there remain optics issues, EDT issues, and electron-arm normalization issues (particularly luminosity monitoring). There is also the issue of MCEEP/COSY and SIMC comparisons with which John Arrington has volunteered to help. We are not quite ready to undertake these comparisons yet. o todo lists were then determined. Foe's list: - continue to get "up to speed" working closely with JL and LW. JH's list: - include more effects in the simulations, such as radiative effects and the contamination of the 16O data by 1H in low-pmiss kinematics - build in the "as-run" experimental kinematic settings from the experiment - compare the MCEEP hypercube results with other Monte Carlo codes (such as the GEANT work of Konrad Aniol) - check the spectrometer model - determine the optimal acceptance cuts -- are Cartesian or R-Functions cuts better? - determine the optimal binning of the data JL's list: - sort out the effect of the different possible "reconstruct" and "beam_vertex" choices in ESPACE. For some combination of these, the analyzer is reproducing ESPACE (as shown at the meeting), for others it is not. Is ESPACE applying a reasonable correction? Do we want to implement these corrections in the analyzer? - add in the target chamber walls and other materials (windows, air, etc) to the energy loss correction objects in the analyzer. - make a study of the beam-position information available from ESPACE. Is the beam position in most runs stable enough that we can correct the analyzer data using the average beam-positions obtained from ESPACE? Or will a new BPM object need to be written for the analyzer? - more electronic deadtime studies: look at T0 distributions for 2-track events, look for kinematics where we have data at multiple beam currents, some other brilliant idea (to be determined). - try to determine the optimal approach to luminosity normalization on the left arm: total number of triggers? Total trigger with some cut(s) on wire chamber data? Something even more restrictive? o finally, we agreed to try meet again in conjuction with the upcoming Hall A Pb experiment E06-007, presently scheduled to run 27 April 2007 through 16 May 2007.