Privacy and Security Notice
Calorimeter Stuff in more detail
Main Calorimeter Page
Plots from John's list of things to do
Alright, first things first. Recall that last time, I picked a some runs at 40 degrees (one or two at
every kinematic setting) to check the calibration that I performed at 18 degrees. That's what the sets of
3 plots side by side on the previous page are for. So, next, I went through all these runs with my favorite calibration
(51101, equal number of "shifted" and "unshifted" events) and fit the electron peak. First a plot of peak positions vs momentum, then a plot of the width
of the peaks vs momentum. Then, the peaks themselves if anyones interested.
Next, From previous page, looking at the frist 4 plots (run 51390 with different calibrations) in more detail.
I looked at hsshtrk.vs.eventID and segregated sets of events at the "high" peak and the "regular" (lower) peak.
Then, I looked at the position dependence of each peak position, and noticed that the "wiggliness" is usually
associated with just one peak position.
However, the calibration can change *which* peak position shows the "wiggliness" in xcal. I'll try to explain.
Let's say we have one peak at hsshtrk=1 and another at 1.1. We have no way to know which one is the "real" peak.
If I plot it vs xcal, let's say that the one at hsshtrk=1.1 shoes the position dependence. Then, I can use
another calibration, and the peaks will come out at 0.9 and 1, respectively, and now the "lower" one will show
the position dependence. So, it *seems* as if the calibration determines which set of events will show the "wiggliness"
I really hope this makes sense. Maybe the plots below will help: in the first 3, the red events show the "wiggliness", whereas
in plot 4 (using JOhn's calibration), it's the blue events.
Here are what the 1-d peaks look like.
Finally, I fit the peaks (high and low ones separately) for the 4 calibrations above and plotted their
values and the widths below.
.
Conclusion: We're all gonna die.
Main