Analysis of (e,e'p) channels:

Comparison of the data to Mceep simulation

To properly compare theoretical calculations to the measured asymmetries, input from MCEEP is needed. At the moment I am working on a more detailed comparison of the measured results to the histograms obtained with MCEEP. Current results show, that improvements to the simulation are needed:

01.)

02.)

03.)

04.)

05.)

06.)

07.)

08.)

09.)

10.)

11.)

12.)

MWDC efficiency problem

I am still trying to find a reason for (only) 50% efficiency for the track reconstruction in BigBite MWDCs. Here is an example of an output from the analyzer for run #3398, where we consider only BigBite single events without tracks.

Cut summary:
Name             Def                                  Called     Passed
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BLOCK: Decode
TriggerT3        (DL.evtypebits&8)==8                 10000      292  (2.92%)
CoincT5          (DL.evtypebits&32)==32               10000      3597 (36%)
CoincT6          (DL.evtypebits&64)==64               10000      2450 (24.5%)
T1               (DL.evtypebits&2)==2                 10000      3180 (31.8%)
Decode_master    T1                                   10000      3180 (31.8%)

BLOCK: Tracking
BBTrack          BB.tr.n==0                           3180       1747 (54.9%)
Tracking_master  BBTrack                              3180       1747 (54.9%)

BLOCK: Physics
HRSLGoldDp       L.gold.dp>-0.045&&L.gold.dp<0.045    1747       68   (3.89%)
HRSLGoldTh       L.gold.th>-0.06&&L.gold.th<0.06      1747       62   (3.55%)
HRSLGoldPh       L.gold.ph>-0.03&&L.gold.ph<0.03      1747       63   (3.61%)
BBTpTrackMatch   BB.tp.trHitIndex>-1                  1747       1747 (100%)
TargetSizeCut    ReactPt_L.z>-0.30&&ReactPt_L.z<0.30  1747       64   (3.66%)

Total     : Real Time =  33.44 seconds Cpu Time =  29.06 seconds
Info in : file ./RasterPlots/BeamRasterPlot_3398.png has been created
YOU JUST ANALYZED RUN number 3398.

My first attempt was to naively change DB parameters for the MWDCs, but this was a dead end. Therefore I decided to make look into the Ole's code. My main obstacle is, that Ole is writing very sophisticated code, that I do not understand very well. Therefore I progress slowly. So far I discovered two things:

1.) There is significant difference between the number of reconstructed roads and number of good roads in each projection. I do not know yet, what causes this this difference. Good roads in all three projections (x, v, u) are required for the reconstruction of full track.

13.)

14.)

15.)

16.)

17.)

18.)

19.)

20.)

2.) There is also many events, which have good roads in all three projections, but still do not have valid track. This still needs to be investigated.

21.)

22.)

Last modified: 09/05/12