Photon Event Mixing
Here photon i from event1 is mixed with photon j=1,2... of event2 if E(j-1)>E(i).
All electrons. C+Fe+Pb+D targets
1D distributions
Fig.1 Invariant mass from uncorrelated events in Z, pT, Q2, Nu bins fitted with POL4
2D distributions
Fig.2a Invariant mass from uncorrelated events in (Z,pT)
Fig.2b Invariant mass from uncorrelated events in (Z,q)
Fig.2c Invariant mass from uncorrelated events in (Z,v)
Fig.2d Invariant mass from uncorrelated events in (pT,q)
Fig.2e Invariant mass from uncorrelated events in (pT,v)
Fig.2e Invariant mass from uncorrelated events in (q,v)
3D distributions
Fig.3a Invariant mass from uncorrelated events in (Z,pT,q)
Fig.3b Invariant mass from uncorrelated events in (Z,pT,v)
Background Fits Comparison
Reason: mixed background fails in high z/pT2 bins due to EC cluster reconstruction
Fig.1a Invariant Mass in Z bins(vertical) for all 6 targets
From left to right 6(targets)x9(zbins) panels background is:
1. unconstrained(limited) POL2; 2. unconstrained(but limited) POL4;
3. [0]*POL4 with parameters from mixing; 4. as 3. with last 2 zbins fitted [0]*1/x; 5. as 3. with last 3 zbins fitted with POL2
Fig.1b Multiplicity ratio for each of the fitting methods correspondingly
Fig.2a Invariant Mass in pT2 bins(vertical) for all 6 targets
1. unconstrained(limited) POL2; 2. unconstrained(but limited) POL4;
3. [0]*POL4 with parameters from mixing; 4. as 3. with last 2 zbins fitted [0]*1/x; 5. as 3. with last 3 zbins fitted with POL2
Fig.2b Multiplicity ratio for each of the fitting methods correspondingly
Fig.3a Invariant Mass in Q2 bins(vertical) for all 6 targets
1. unconstrained(limited) POL2; 2. unconstrained(but limited) POL4;
3. [0]*POL4 with parameters from mixing; 4. as 3. with last 3 zbins fitted with POL2
Fig.3b Multiplicity ratio for each of the fitting methods correspondingly
Fig.4a Invariant Mass in V bins(vertical) for all 6 targets
1. unconstrained(limited) POL2; 2. unconstrained(but limited) POL4;
3. [0]*POL4 with parameters from mixing; 4. as 3. with last 3 zbins fitted with POL2
Fig.4b Multiplicity ratio for each of the fitting methods correspondingly
Fig.2