Difference: SzymonsSandbox (1 vs. 9)

Revision 9
29 Feb 2016 - Main.SzymonHarabasz
Line: 1 to 1
 

Szymon's Personal Page

  • k-factor calculated by simulating pairs with homogoneous distributions of mass, transverse momentum and rapidity, and then filtering them by single-leg acceptance matrices

6 sectors active 6 sectors active 5 sectors active 4 sectors active
the missing ones next
to each other
4 sectors active
the missing ones
separatedby one good
4 sectors active
the missing ones are
opposite
kfac_white_mass.gif kfac_white_massoa.gif kfac_white_massoa_5sec.gif kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d0.gif kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d1.gif kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d2.gif
Comment:Now I change my mind slightly, the effect is visible also here and the reason, why it's so small might be different population of phase space in data and in this Pluto simulation
Changed:
<
<
  • Invariant mass signal with and without Piotr factor (for the record: spectra are corrected for single-leg efficiency /emb. to UrQMD/, the same k-factor is used in both cases, no sector factor was applied, PID was done with MLP weights No. 6)

>
>
  • Invariant mass signal with and without Piotr factor (for the record: spectra are corrected for single-leg efficiency /emb. to UrQMD/, the same k-factor is used in both cases, no sector factor was applied, PID was done with MLP weights No. 6)

 

sig_corr_weight6_nofactorsVsPiotrFactor.gif

Comment:When the cut on opening angle > 9 deg is applied, only small part of the Piotr factor plays a role and only in very small masses, it has no influence above π0
Changed:
<
<
  • Combinatorial background from simulation (no corrections or fetch factors, Geant PID and reconstuction / identification cuts):
    bgr_sim.png missid_sim.png

>
>
  • Combinatorial background from simulation (no corrections or fetch factors, Geant PID and reconstuction / identification cuts):
    bgr_sim.png missid_sim.png

 

Comment: There is a small difference between true unlike-sign CB and geometrical average of like-sing CB (also taken from true leptons). The contribution of misidentified electron-proton pairs is negligible, the contribution of electron-pion pairs of all signs amounts to 1% of the true background, but when separeted to different signs it cancels out to big extent.
  • Signal from UrQMD, left: true cocktail, right: true signal and after subtracktion like-sign background.:
    • sig_urqmd.png
Changed:
<
<
sig_true_likesign.png

>
>
sig_true_likesign.png

 

Comment: When like-sign combinatorial background is subtracted, the signal differs much from the true one - the "bump" appears. It is not improved much by applying the k-factor correction
  • k-factor from mixing EXP and UrQMD, with and without the efficiency correction. Background in SIM with and without k-factor.:
    kfac_kine_mass_cmp.gif kfac_richQa10_MLP06_rawcorr_expsim.gif
Changed:
<
<
bgr_sim_knok.gif

>
>
bgr_sim_knok.gif

 

Comment: There is no big difference between k-factor obrained from event mixing in UrQMD and in real data. The trend by applying single-leg efficiency correction while calculating k-factor is also the same in SIM and in EXP.
Line: 35 to 35
  Comment Here the difference can be seen in detail. Discrepancy betwen reco in EXP and in SIM (besides just statistics problem is SIM) may come from the fact, that not all efficiency effects (and so correlations) are reproduces in digitizers.

RAW withhout k-factor:

Changed:
<
<
mass_centrdep_nok.gif

Signal
+-
Background
integral_centrdep_pi0_nok_raw.gifintegral_centrdep_midm_nok_raw.gif integral_centrdep_npmidm_raw.gif integral_centrdep_bgrmidm_raw_nok.gif
>
>
mass_centrdep_nok.gifintegral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_raw_nok.gifintegral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_raw_nok.gif
 

RAW with k-factor

Changed:
<
<
mass_centrdep_raw.gif
>
>
mass_centrdep_raw.gifintegral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_raw_withk.gifintegral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_raw_withk.gif
 
Deleted:
<
<
Signal +- Background
integral_centrdep_pi0_raw.gifintegral_centrdep_midm_raw.gif integral_centrdep_npmidm_raw.gif integral_centrdep_bgrmidm_raw.gif
  Comment: There is no huge difference in trend whether you use k-factor or not. Even if k-factor would be wrong by 10%, you will not recover centrality dependence if you reduce this uncertainty.

CORR withhout k-factor:

Changed:
<
<
mass_centrdep_nok.gif

integral_centrdep_pi0_nok.gifintegral_centrdep_midm_nok.gif
>
>
mass_centrdep_nok.gifintegral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_corr_nok.gifintegral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_corr_nok.gif
 

Comment: The yield below 100 MeV is more or less constant, when normalized to the number of π0. In the higher masses there is a slight trend, but within errors it is consistent with constant. When looking at all +-combinations there is a clear increase with more central events, bu it's the same in the like-sign background and therefore it's mainly canceled out in the signal.The "all PT3" bin is also slightly out of the trend.

CORR with k-factor

Changed:
<
<
mass_centrdep.gif

integral_centrdep_pi0.gifintegral_centrdep_midm.gif
>
>
mass_centrdep.gifintegral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_corr_withk.gifintegral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_corr_withk.gif
 

Comment: With k-factor applied, the dependence at higher masses is even reduced.
Added:
>
>

Just for fun: scale the background by 0.8 before subtracting (this is CORR without k-factor)

integral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_corr_nok_bgr08test.gifintegral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_corr_nok_bgr08test.gif
 

mass-pt:

+- mixing ++ mixing -- mixing geom. avg. mixing k-factor k-factor Kine mixing
masspt_npmix.gif masspt_ppmix.gif masspt_nnmix.gif masspt_avgmix.gif masspt_kfac.gif kfac_kine_masspt.gif
Line: 167 to 156
 
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="nem_kine_seco30.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125351" name="nem_kine_seco30.gif" path="nem_kine_seco30.gif" size="14827" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="mass_centrdep_raw_nok.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125655" name="mass_centrdep_raw_nok.gif" path="mass_centrdep_raw_nok.gif" size="40723" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="mass_centrdep_raw.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125673" name="mass_centrdep_raw.gif" path="mass_centrdep_raw.gif" size="41711" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Added:
>
>
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_corr_nok_bgr08test.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1456739507" name="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_corr_nok_bgr08test.gif" path="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_corr_nok_bgr08test.gif" size="13477" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_corr_nok_bgr08test.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1456739525" name="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_corr_nok_bgr08test.gif" path="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_corr_nok_bgr08test.gif" size="12777" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_corr_withk.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1456739535" name="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_corr_withk.gif" path="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_corr_withk.gif" size="12743" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_corr_nok.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1456739540" name="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_corr_nok.gif" path="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_corr_nok.gif" size="12769" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_raw_nok.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1456739545" name="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_raw_nok.gif" path="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_raw_nok.gif" size="12256" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_raw_withk.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1456739549" name="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_raw_withk.gif" path="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_midm_raw_withk.gif" size="12274" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_raw_withk.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1456739556" name="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_raw_withk.gif" path="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_raw_withk.gif" size="12243" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_raw_nok.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1456739560" name="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_raw_nok.gif" path="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_raw_nok.gif" size="12226" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_corr_nok.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1456739570" name="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_corr_nok.gif" path="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_corr_nok.gif" size="13488" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_corr_withk.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1456739576" name="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_corr_withk.gif" path="integral_centrdep_npcbsig_pi0_corr_withk.gif" size="13458" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Revision 8
10 Feb 2016 - Main.SzymonHarabasz
Line: 1 to 1
 

Szymon's Personal Page

  • k-factor calculated by simulating pairs with homogoneous distributions of mass, transverse momentum and rapidity, and then filtering them by single-leg acceptance matrices

6 sectors active 6 sectors active 5 sectors active 4 sectors active
the missing ones next
to each other
4 sectors active
the missing ones
separatedby one good
4 sectors active
the missing ones are
opposite
kfac_white_mass.gif kfac_white_massoa.gif kfac_white_massoa_5sec.gif kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d0.gif kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d1.gif kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d2.gif
Changed:
<
<
Comment:Now I change my mind slightly, the effect is visible also here and the reason, why it's so small might be different population of phase space in data and in this Pluto simulation
  • Invariant mass signal with and without Piotr factor (for the record: spectra are corrected for single-leg efficiency /emb. to UrQMD/, the same k-factor is used in both cases, no sector factor was applied, PID was done with MLP weights No. 6)

>
>
Comment:Now I change my mind slightly, the effect is visible also here and the reason, why it's so small might be different population of phase space in data and in this Pluto simulation
  • Invariant mass signal with and without Piotr factor (for the record: spectra are corrected for single-leg efficiency /emb. to UrQMD/, the same k-factor is used in both cases, no sector factor was applied, PID was done with MLP weights No. 6)

 

sig_corr_weight6_nofactorsVsPiotrFactor.gif
Changed:
<
<
Comment:When the cut on opening angle > 9 deg is applied, only small part of the Piotr factor plays a role and only in very small masses, it has no influence above π0
  • Combinatorial background from simulation (no corrections or fetch factors, Geant PID and reconstuction / identification cuts):
    bgr_sim.png missid_sim.png

>
>
Comment:When the cut on opening angle > 9 deg is applied, only small part of the Piotr factor plays a role and only in very small masses, it has no influence above π0
  • Combinatorial background from simulation (no corrections or fetch factors, Geant PID and reconstuction / identification cuts):
    bgr_sim.png missid_sim.png

 

Comment: There is a small difference between true unlike-sign CB and geometrical average of like-sing CB (also taken from true leptons). The contribution of misidentified electron-proton pairs is negligible, the contribution of electron-pion pairs of all signs amounts to 1% of the true background, but when separeted to different signs it cancels out to big extent.
Deleted:
<
<
 
    • Signal from UrQMD, left: true cocktail, right: true signal and after subtracktion like-sign background.:
Added:
>
>
  sig_urqmd.png
Changed:
<
<
sig_true_likesign.png

>
>
sig_true_likesign.png

 

Comment: When like-sign combinatorial background is subtracted, the signal differs much from the true one - the "bump" appears. It is not improved much by applying the k-factor correction
  • k-factor from mixing EXP and UrQMD, with and without the efficiency correction. Background in SIM with and without k-factor.:
Changed:
<
<
kfac_kine_mass_cmp.gif  kfac_richQa10_MLP06_rawcorr_expsim.gif bgr_sim_knok.gif

>
>
kfac_kine_mass_cmp.gif kfac_richQa10_MLP06_rawcorr_expsim.gif bgr_sim_knok.gif

 

Comment: There is no big difference between k-factor obrained from event mixing in UrQMD and in real data. The trend by applying single-leg efficiency correction while calculating k-factor is also the same in SIM and in EXP.
Changed:
<
<

Withhout k-factor:

>
>

kfac_richQa10_MLP06_raw_exp_centrdep.gifkfac_richQa10_MLP06_raw_sim_centrdep.gifkfac_kine_mass_centrdep.gif

Comment There is no centraluty dependence in the level of HGeantKine filtered through one-leg efficiency. On the level of tracks reconstructed in EXP or in SIM, centrality dependence is quite similar, although SIM suffers from statistics. On the HGeantKine level filtering both legs by efficiency assumes, that efficiencies to reconstruct both leptons are indpendent. The difference to k-factor from reconstructed tracks in EXP or SIM shows, that this is not the case and there are correlations, that can depend on the multiplicity.

kfac_ratios_mult0.gifkfac_ratios_mult1.gifkfac_ratios_mult2.gifkfac_ratios_mult3.gifkfac_ratios_mult4.gif

multbin1 - most central, multbin4 - most peripheral

Comment Here the difference can be seen in detail. Discrepancy betwen reco in EXP and in SIM (besides just statistics problem is SIM) may come from the fact, that not all efficiency effects (and so correlations) are reproduces in digitizers.

RAW withhout k-factor:

mass_centrdep_nok.gif

Signal
+-
Background
integral_centrdep_pi0_nok_raw.gifintegral_centrdep_midm_nok_raw.gif integral_centrdep_npmidm_raw.gif integral_centrdep_bgrmidm_raw_nok.gif

RAW with k-factor

mass_centrdep_raw.gif

Signal +- Background
integral_centrdep_pi0_raw.gifintegral_centrdep_midm_raw.gif integral_centrdep_npmidm_raw.gif integral_centrdep_bgrmidm_raw.gif
Comment: There is no huge difference in trend whether you use k-factor or not. Even if k-factor would be wrong by 10%, you will not recover centrality dependence if you reduce this uncertainty.

CORR withhout k-factor:

 

mass_centrdep_nok.gif

integral_centrdep_pi0_nok.gifintegral_centrdep_midm_nok.gif

Comment: The yield below 100 MeV is more or less constant, when normalized to the number of π0. In the higher masses there is a slight trend, but within errors it is consistent with constant. When looking at all +-combinations there is a clear increase with more central events, bu it's the same in the like-sign background and therefore it's mainly canceled out in the signal.The "all PT3" bin is also slightly out of the trend.
Changed:
<
<

With k-factor

>
>

CORR with k-factor

 

mass_centrdep.gif
Line: 55 to 83
 
oapt_npdata.gif oapt_ppdata.gif oapt_nndata.gif oapt_avgdata.gif oapt_sigdata.gif  
Comment: The problem with 0 acceptance for ++pairs is also visible in this representation
Added:
>
>
Is pair production Poissonian?

Number of all electrons and positrons. produced in decays
  -- SzymonHarabasz - 03 Feb 2016

META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_white_mass.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454512637" name="kfac_white_mass.gif" path="kfac_white_mass.gif" size="15110" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Line: 116 to 148
 
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_kine_oapt.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454871989" name="kfac_kine_oapt.gif" path="kfac_kine_oapt.gif" size="40758" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_kine_mass.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454933985" name="kfac_kine_mass.gif" path="kfac_kine_mass.gif" size="13498" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_kine_mass_cmp.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454934056" name="kfac_kine_mass_cmp.gif" path="kfac_kine_mass_cmp.gif" size="13498" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Added:
>
>
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_ratios_mult4.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455124982" name="kfac_ratios_mult4.gif" path="kfac_ratios_mult4.gif" size="17291" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_ratios_mult3.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455124992" name="kfac_ratios_mult3.gif" path="kfac_ratios_mult3.gif" size="16179" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_ratios_mult2.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455124999" name="kfac_ratios_mult2.gif" path="kfac_ratios_mult2.gif" size="14932" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_ratios_mult1.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125004" name="kfac_ratios_mult1.gif" path="kfac_ratios_mult1.gif" size="15693" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_ratios_mult0.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125008" name="kfac_ratios_mult0.gif" path="kfac_ratios_mult0.gif" size="13973" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_richQa10_MLP06_raw_exp_centrdep.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125027" name="kfac_richQa10_MLP06_raw_exp_centrdep.gif" path="kfac_richQa10_MLP06_raw_exp_centrdep.gif" size="17633" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_richQa10_MLP06_raw_sim_centrdep.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125037" name="kfac_richQa10_MLP06_raw_sim_centrdep.gif" path="kfac_richQa10_MLP06_raw_sim_centrdep.gif" size="19352" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_kine_mass_centrdep.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125047" name="kfac_kine_mass_centrdep.gif" path="kfac_kine_mass_centrdep.gif" size="12044" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_midm_nok_raw.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125259" name="integral_centrdep_midm_nok_raw.gif" path="integral_centrdep_midm_nok_raw.gif" size="11115" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_midm_raw.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125273" name="integral_centrdep_midm_raw.gif" path="integral_centrdep_midm_raw.gif" size="11157" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_pi0_raw.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125284" name="integral_centrdep_pi0_raw.gif" path="integral_centrdep_pi0_raw.gif" size="9612" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_pi0_nok_raw.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125295" name="integral_centrdep_pi0_nok_raw.gif" path="integral_centrdep_pi0_nok_raw.gif" size="9732" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_bgrmidm_raw.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125311" name="integral_centrdep_bgrmidm_raw.gif" path="integral_centrdep_bgrmidm_raw.gif" size="10018" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_bgrmidm_raw_nok.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125320" name="integral_centrdep_bgrmidm_raw_nok.gif" path="integral_centrdep_bgrmidm_raw_nok.gif" size="10009" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_npmidm_raw.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125335" name="integral_centrdep_npmidm_raw.gif" path="integral_centrdep_npmidm_raw.gif" size="10039" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="nep_kine_seco30.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125342" name="nep_kine_seco30.gif" path="nep_kine_seco30.gif" size="13128" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="nem_kine_seco30.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125351" name="nem_kine_seco30.gif" path="nem_kine_seco30.gif" size="14827" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="mass_centrdep_raw_nok.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125655" name="mass_centrdep_raw_nok.gif" path="mass_centrdep_raw_nok.gif" size="40723" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="mass_centrdep_raw.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1455125673" name="mass_centrdep_raw.gif" path="mass_centrdep_raw.gif" size="41711" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Revision 7
08 Feb 2016 - Main.SzymonHarabasz
Line: 1 to 1
 

Szymon's Personal Page

  • k-factor calculated by simulating pairs with homogoneous distributions of mass, transverse momentum and rapidity, and then filtering them by single-leg acceptance matrices

6 sectors active 6 sectors active 5 sectors active 4 sectors active
the missing ones next
to each other
4 sectors active
the missing ones
separatedby one good
4 sectors active
the missing ones are
opposite
kfac_white_mass.gif kfac_white_massoa.gif kfac_white_massoa_5sec.gif kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d0.gif kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d1.gif kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d2.gif
Comment:Now I change my mind slightly, the effect is visible also here and the reason, why it's so small might be different population of phase space in data and in this Pluto simulation
Changed:
<
<
  • Invariant mass signal with and without Piotr factor (for the record: spectra are corrected for single-leg efficiency /emb. to UrQMD/, the same k-factor is used in both cases, no sector factor was applied, PID was done with MLP weights No. 6)

>
>
  • Invariant mass signal with and without Piotr factor (for the record: spectra are corrected for single-leg efficiency /emb. to UrQMD/, the same k-factor is used in both cases, no sector factor was applied, PID was done with MLP weights No. 6)

 

sig_corr_weight6_nofactorsVsPiotrFactor.gif

Comment:When the cut on opening angle > 9 deg is applied, only small part of the Piotr factor plays a role and only in very small masses, it has no influence above π0
Changed:
<
<
  • Combinatorial background from simulation (no corrections or fetch factors, Geant PID and reconstuction / identification cuts):
    bgr_sim.png missid_sim.png

>
>
  • Combinatorial background from simulation (no corrections or fetch factors, Geant PID and reconstuction / identification cuts):
    bgr_sim.png missid_sim.png

 

Comment: There is a small difference between true unlike-sign CB and geometrical average of like-sing CB (also taken from true leptons). The contribution of misidentified electron-proton pairs is negligible, the contribution of electron-pion pairs of all signs amounts to 1% of the true background, but when separeted to different signs it cancels out to big extent.
    • Signal from UrQMD, left: true cocktail, right: true signal and after subtracktion like-sign background.:
      sig_urqmd.png
Changed:
<
<
sig_true_likesign.png

>
>
sig_true_likesign.png

 

Comment: When like-sign combinatorial background is subtracted, the signal differs much from the true one - the "bump" appears. It is not improved much by applying the k-factor correction
  • k-factor from mixing EXP and UrQMD, with and without the efficiency correction. Background in SIM with and without k-factor.:
Changed:
<
<
kfac_kine_mass.gif kfac_richQa10_MLP06_rawcorr_expsim.gif bgr_sim_knok.gif

>
>
kfac_kine_mass_cmp.gif  kfac_richQa10_MLP06_rawcorr_expsim.gif bgr_sim_knok.gif

 

Comment: There is no big difference between k-factor obrained from event mixing in UrQMD and in real data. The trend by applying single-leg efficiency correction while calculating k-factor is also the same in SIM and in EXP.

Withhout k-factor:

Line: 111 to 111
 
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_npdata_9deg.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454688206" name="oamass_npdata_9deg.gif" path="oamass_npdata_9deg.gif" size="18499" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_ppdata_9deg.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454688211" name="oamass_ppdata_9deg.gif" path="oamass_ppdata_9deg.gif" size="23393" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_sigdata_9deg.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454688219" name="oamass_sigdata_9deg.gif" path="oamass_sigdata_9deg.gif" size="22214" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Deleted:
<
<
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_kine_mass.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454872588" name="kfac_kine_mass.gif" path="kfac_kine_mass.gif" size="8871" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="2"
 
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_kine_massoa.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454871977" name="kfac_kine_massoa.gif" path="kfac_kine_massoa.gif" size="32289" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_kine_masspt.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454871985" name="kfac_kine_masspt.gif" path="kfac_kine_masspt.gif" size="23869" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_kine_oapt.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454871989" name="kfac_kine_oapt.gif" path="kfac_kine_oapt.gif" size="40758" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Added:
>
>
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_kine_mass.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454933985" name="kfac_kine_mass.gif" path="kfac_kine_mass.gif" size="13498" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_kine_mass_cmp.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454934056" name="kfac_kine_mass_cmp.gif" path="kfac_kine_mass_cmp.gif" size="13498" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Revision 6
07 Feb 2016 - Main.SzymonHarabasz
Line: 1 to 1
 

Szymon's Personal Page

  • k-factor calculated by simulating pairs with homogoneous distributions of mass, transverse momentum and rapidity, and then filtering them by single-leg acceptance matrices

6 sectors active 6 sectors active 5 sectors active 4 sectors active
the missing ones next
to each other
4 sectors active
the missing ones
separatedby one good
4 sectors active
the missing ones are
opposite
kfac_white_mass.gif kfac_white_massoa.gif kfac_white_massoa_5sec.gif kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d0.gif kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d1.gif kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d2.gif
Comment: Now I change my mind slightly, the effect is visible also here and the reason, why it's so small might be different population of phase space in data and in this Pluto simulation
Changed:
<
<
  • Invariant mass signal with and without Piotr factor (for the record: spectra are corrected for single-leg efficiency /emb. to UrQMD /, the same k-factor is used in both cases, no sector factor was applied, PID was done with MLP weights No. 6)
>
>
  • Invariant mass signal with and without Piotr factor (for the record: spectra are corrected for single-leg efficiency /emb. to UrQMD/, the same k-factor is used in both cases, no sector factor was applied, PID was done with MLP weights No. 6)

  sig_corr_weight6_nofactorsVsPiotrFactor.gif

Comment: When the cut on opening angle > 9 deg is applied, only small part of the Piotr factor plays a role and only in very small masses, it has no influence above π0
Changed:
<
<
  • Combinatorial background from simulation (no corrections or fetch factors, Geant PID and reconstuction / identification cuts):
    bgr_sim.png missid_sim.png
>
>
  • Combinatorial background from simulation (no corrections or fetch factors, Geant PID and reconstuction / identification cuts):
    bgr_sim.png missid_sim.png

  Comment: There is a small difference between true unlike-sign CB and geometrical average of like-sing CB (also taken from true leptons). The contribution of misidentified electron-proton pairs is negligible, the contribution of electron-pion pairs of all signs amounts to 1% of the true background, but when separeted to different signs it cancels out to big extent.
Added:
>
>
 
    • Signal from UrQMD, left: true cocktail, right: true signal and after subtracktion like-sign background.:
      sig_urqmd.png
Changed:
<
<
sig_true_likesign.png
>
>
sig_true_likesign.png

  Comment: When like-sign combinatorial background is subtracted, the signal differs much from the true one - the "bump" appears. It is not improved much by applying the k-factor correction
  • k-factor from mixing EXP and UrQMD, with and without the efficiency correction. Background in SIM with and without k-factor.:
Changed:
<
<
kfac_richQa10_MLP06_rawcorr_expsim.gif bgr_sim_knok.gif
>
>
kfac_kine_mass.gif kfac_richQa10_MLP06_rawcorr_expsim.gif bgr_sim_knok.gif

  Comment: There is no big difference between k-factor obrained from event mixing in UrQMD and in real data. The trend by applying single-leg efficiency correction while calculating k-factor is also the same in SIM and in EXP.

Withhout k-factor:

Line: 24 to 29
 

integral_centrdep_pi0_nok.gifintegral_centrdep_midm_nok.gif
Changed:
<
<
Comment: The yield below 100 MeV is more or less constant, when normalized to the number of π0. In the higher masses there is a slight trend, but within errors it is consistent with constant. When looking at all +- combinations there is a clear increase with more central events, bu it's the same in the like-sign background and therefore it's mainly canceled out in the signal.The "all PT3" bin is also slightly out of the trend.
>
>
Comment: The yield below 100 MeV is more or less constant, when normalized to the number of π0. In the higher masses there is a slight trend, but within errors it is consistent with constant. When looking at all +-combinations there is a clear increase with more central events, bu it's the same in the like-sign background and therefore it's mainly canceled out in the signal.The "all PT3" bin is also slightly out of the trend.
 

With k-factor

mass_centrdep.gif
Line: 33 to 38
 

Comment: With k-factor applied, the dependence at higher masses is even reduced.

mass-pt:

Changed:
<
<
+- mixing ++ mixing -- mixing geom. avg. mixing k-factor
masspt_npmix.gif masspt_ppmix.gif masspt_nnmix.gif masspt_avgmix.gif masspt_kfac.gif
+- data ++ data -- data geom. avg. data signal data
masspt_npdata.gif masspt_ppdata.gif masspt_nndata.gif masspt_avgdata.gif masspt_sigdata.gif
Comment: Note the trouble when calculating geometric mean in m-pt representation, for low mass and low pt. Going towards higher values of both observables first only -- pairs are present and only they are taken as the background. Then there are borth ++ and --, but there are only few ++ and this reduces the geometric average. Then there is sufficient amount of both signs and the average has a reasonable value. As a consequence the average is artificially jumping up and down and this is reflected also by the k-factor.
>
>
+- mixing ++ mixing -- mixing geom. avg. mixing k-factor k-factor Kine mixing
masspt_npmix.gif masspt_ppmix.gif masspt_nnmix.gif masspt_avgmix.gif masspt_kfac.gif kfac_kine_masspt.gif
+- data ++ data -- data geom. avg. data signal data  
masspt_npdata.gif masspt_ppdata.gif masspt_nndata.gif masspt_avgdata.gif masspt_sigdata.gif  
Comment: Note the trouble when calculating geometric mean in m-pt representation, for low mass and low pt. Going towards higher values of both observables first only -- pairs are present and only they are taken as the background. Then there are borth ++ and --, but there are only few ++and this reduces the geometric average. Then there is sufficient amount of both signs and the average has a reasonable value. As a consequence the average is artificially jumping up and down and this is reflected also by the k-factor.
 

mass-opening angle

Changed:
<
<
+- mixing ++ mixing -- mixing geom. avg. mixing k-factor
oamass_npmix.gif oamass_ppmix.gif oamass_nnmix.gif oamass_avgmix.gif oamass_kfac.gif
+- data ++ data -- data geom. avg. data signal data
oamass_npdata_deg.gif oamass_ppdata_9deg.gif oamass_nndata_9deg.gif oamass_avgdata_9deg.gif oamass_sigdata_9deg.gif
>
>
+- mixing ++ mixing -- mixing geom. avg. mixing k-factor k-factor Kine mixing
oamass_npmix.gif oamass_ppmix.gif oamass_nnmix.gif oamass_avgmix.gif oamass_kfac.gif kfac_kine_massoa.gif
+- data ++ data -- data geom. avg. data signal data  
oamass_npdata_deg.gif oamass_ppdata_9deg.gif oamass_nndata_9deg.gif oamass_avgdata_9deg.gif oamass_sigdata_9deg.gif  
 

pt-opening angle

Changed:
<
<
+- mixing ++ mixing -- mixing geom. avg. mixing k-factor
oapt_npmix.gif oapt_ppmix.gif oapt_nnmix.gif oapt_avgmix.gif oapt_kfac.gif
+- data ++ data -- data geom. avg. data signal data
oapt_npdata.gif oapt_ppdata.gif oapt_nndata.gif oapt_avgdata.gif oapt_sigdata.gif
Comment: The problem with 0 acceptance for ++ pairs is also visible in this representation
>
>
+- mixing ++ mixing -- mixing geom. avg. mixing k-factor k-factor Kine mixing
oapt_npmix.gif oapt_ppmix.gif oapt_nnmix.gif oapt_avgmix.gif oapt_kfac.gif kfac_kine_oapt.gif
+- data ++ data -- data geom. avg. data signal data  
oapt_npdata.gif oapt_ppdata.gif oapt_nndata.gif oapt_avgdata.gif oapt_sigdata.gif  
Comment: The problem with 0 acceptance for ++pairs is also visible in this representation
 

-- SzymonHarabasz - 03 Feb 2016
Line: 106 to 111
 
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_npdata_9deg.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454688206" name="oamass_npdata_9deg.gif" path="oamass_npdata_9deg.gif" size="18499" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_ppdata_9deg.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454688211" name="oamass_ppdata_9deg.gif" path="oamass_ppdata_9deg.gif" size="23393" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_sigdata_9deg.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454688219" name="oamass_sigdata_9deg.gif" path="oamass_sigdata_9deg.gif" size="22214" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Added:
>
>
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_kine_mass.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454872588" name="kfac_kine_mass.gif" path="kfac_kine_mass.gif" size="8871" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="2"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_kine_massoa.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454871977" name="kfac_kine_massoa.gif" path="kfac_kine_massoa.gif" size="32289" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_kine_masspt.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454871985" name="kfac_kine_masspt.gif" path="kfac_kine_masspt.gif" size="23869" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_kine_oapt.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454871989" name="kfac_kine_oapt.gif" path="kfac_kine_oapt.gif" size="40758" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Revision 5
07 Feb 2016 - Main.SzymonHarabasz
Line: 1 to 1
 

Szymon's Personal Page

Changed:
<
<
  • k-factor calculated by simulating pairs with homogoneous distributions of mass, transverse momentum and rapidity, and then filtering them by single-leg acceptance matrices
    Now I change my mind slightly, the effect is visible also here and the reason, why it's so small might be different population of phase space in data and in this Pluto simulation
>
>
  • k-factor calculated by simulating pairs with homogoneous distributions of mass, transverse momentum and rapidity, and then filtering them by single-leg acceptance matrices
 

6 sectors active 6 sectors active 5 sectors active 4 sectors active
the missing ones next
to each other
4 sectors active
the missing ones
separatedby one good
4 sectors active
the missing ones are
opposite
kfac_white_mass.gif kfac_white_massoa.gif kfac_white_massoa_5sec.gif kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d0.gif kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d1.gif kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d2.gif
Changed:
<
<
  • Invariant mass signal with and without Piotr factor (for the record: spectra are corrected for single-leg efficiency /emb. to UrQMD /, the same k-factor is used in both cases, no sector factor was applied, PID was done with MLP weights No. 6)
    sig_corr_weight6_nofactorsVsPiotrFactor.gif
  • Combinatorial background from simulation (no corrections of fetch factors, Geant PID and reconstuction / identification cuts):
    bgr_sim.png missid_sim.png

>
>
Comment: Now I change my mind slightly, the effect is visible also here and the reason, why it's so small might be different population of phase space in data and in this Pluto simulation
  • Invariant mass signal with and without Piotr factor (for the record: spectra are corrected for single-leg efficiency /emb. to UrQMD /, the same k-factor is used in both cases, no sector factor was applied, PID was done with MLP weights No. 6)
sig_corr_weight6_nofactorsVsPiotrFactor.gif

Comment: When the cut on opening angle > 9 deg is applied, only small part of the Piotr factor plays a role and only in very small masses, it has no influence above π0
  • Combinatorial background from simulation (no corrections or fetch factors, Geant PID and reconstuction / identification cuts):
    bgr_sim.png missid_sim.png
Comment: There is a small difference between true unlike-sign CB and geometrical average of like-sing CB (also taken from true leptons). The contribution of misidentified electron-proton pairs is negligible, the contribution of electron-pion pairs of all signs amounts to 1% of the true background, but when separeted to different signs it cancels out to big extent.
 
  • Signal from UrQMD, left: true cocktail, right: true signal and after subtracktion like-sign background.:
    sig_urqmd.png
Changed:
<
<
sig_true_likesign.png

>
>
sig_true_likesign.png Comment: When like-sign combinatorial background is subtracted, the signal differs much from the true one - the "bump" appears. It is not improved much by applying the k-factor correction
 
  • k-factor from mixing EXP and UrQMD, with and without the efficiency correction. Background in SIM with and without k-factor.:
    kfac_richQa10_MLP06_rawcorr_expsim.gif bgr_sim_knok.gif
Added:
>
>
Comment: There is no big difference between k-factor obrained from event mixing in UrQMD and in real data. The trend by applying single-leg efficiency correction while calculating k-factor is also the same in SIM and in EXP.
 

Withhout k-factor:

mass_centrdep_nok.gif

integral_centrdep_pi0_nok.gifintegral_centrdep_midm_nok.gif
Added:
>
>

Comment: The yield below 100 MeV is more or less constant, when normalized to the number of π0. In the higher masses there is a slight trend, but within errors it is consistent with constant. When looking at all +- combinations there is a clear increase with more central events, bu it's the same in the like-sign background and therefore it's mainly canceled out in the signal.The "all PT3" bin is also slightly out of the trend.
 

With k-factor

mass_centrdep.gif

integral_centrdep_pi0.gifintegral_centrdep_midm.gif
Added:
>
>

Comment: With k-factor applied, the dependence at higher masses is even reduced.
 

mass-pt:

+- mixing ++ mixing -- mixing geom. avg. mixing k-factor
masspt_npmix.gif masspt_ppmix.gif masspt_nnmix.gif masspt_avgmix.gif masspt_kfac.gif
+- data ++ data -- data geom. avg. data signal data
masspt_npdata.gif masspt_ppdata.gif masspt_nndata.gif masspt_avgdata.gif masspt_sigdata.gif
Added:
>
>
Comment: Note the trouble when calculating geometric mean in m-pt representation, for low mass and low pt. Going towards higher values of both observables first only -- pairs are present and only they are taken as the background. Then there are borth ++ and --, but there are only few ++ and this reduces the geometric average. Then there is sufficient amount of both signs and the average has a reasonable value. As a consequence the average is artificially jumping up and down and this is reflected also by the k-factor.
 

mass-opening angle

+- mixing ++ mixing -- mixing geom. avg. mixing k-factor
oamass_npmix.gif oamass_ppmix.gif oamass_nnmix.gif oamass_avgmix.gif oamass_kfac.gif
Line: 36 to 48
 
oapt_npmix.gif oapt_ppmix.gif oapt_nnmix.gif oapt_avgmix.gif oapt_kfac.gif
+- data ++ data -- data geom. avg. data signal data
oapt_npdata.gif oapt_ppdata.gif oapt_nndata.gif oapt_avgdata.gif oapt_sigdata.gif
Added:
>
>
Comment: The problem with 0 acceptance for ++ pairs is also visible in this representation
  -- SzymonHarabasz - 03 Feb 2016

META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_white_mass.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454512637" name="kfac_white_mass.gif" path="kfac_white_mass.gif" size="15110" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Revision 4
05 Feb 2016 - Main.SzymonHarabasz
Line: 1 to 1
 

Szymon's Personal Page

  • k-factor calculated by simulating pairs with homogoneous distributions of mass, transverse momentum and rapidity, and then filtering them by single-leg acceptance matrices
    Now I change my mind slightly, the effect is visible also here and the reason, why it's so small might be different population of phase space in data and in this Pluto simulation
Line: 30 to 30
 
+- mixing ++ mixing -- mixing geom. avg. mixing k-factor
oamass_npmix.gif oamass_ppmix.gif oamass_nnmix.gif oamass_avgmix.gif oamass_kfac.gif
+- data ++ data -- data geom. avg. data signal data
Changed:
<
<
oamass_npdata.gif oamass_ppdata.gif oamass_nndata.gif oamass_avgdata.gif oamass_sigdata.gif
>
>
oamass_npdata_deg.gif oamass_ppdata_9deg.gif oamass_nndata_9deg.gif oamass_avgdata_9deg.gif oamass_sigdata_9deg.gif
 

pt-opening angle

+- mixing ++ mixing -- mixing geom. avg. mixing k-factor
oapt_npmix.gif oapt_ppmix.gif oapt_nnmix.gif oapt_avgmix.gif oapt_kfac.gif
Line: 72 to 72
 
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_npdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679057" name="oamass_npdata.gif" path="oamass_npdata.gif" size="16667" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_ppdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679060" name="oamass_ppdata.gif" path="oamass_ppdata.gif" size="23112" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_nndata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679064" name="oamass_nndata.gif" path="oamass_nndata.gif" size="20773" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Changed:
<
<
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_avgdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679071" name="oamass_avgdata.gif" path="oamass_avgdata.gif" size="21913" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
>
>
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_avgdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454688131" name="oamass_avgdata.gif" path="oamass_avgdata_9deg.gif" size="22110" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="2"
 
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_sigdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679076" name="oamass_sigdata.gif" path="oamass_sigdata.gif" size="21437" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oapt_npdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679082" name="oapt_npdata.gif" path="oapt_npdata.gif" size="20523" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oapt_ppdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679086" name="oapt_ppdata.gif" path="oapt_ppdata.gif" size="27293" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Line: 87 to 87
 
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oapt_nnmix.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454681198" name="oapt_nnmix.gif" path="oapt_nnmix.gif" size="22747" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oapt_avgmix.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454681203" name="oapt_avgmix.gif" path="oapt_avgmix.gif" size="23396" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oapt_kfac.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454681214" name="oapt_kfac.gif" path="oapt_kfac.gif" size="31360" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Added:
>
>
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_avgdata_9deg.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454688190" name="oamass_avgdata_9deg.gif" path="oamass_avgdata_9deg.gif" size="22110" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_nndata_9deg.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454688199" name="oamass_nndata_9deg.gif" path="oamass_nndata_9deg.gif" size="21223" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_npdata_9deg.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454688206" name="oamass_npdata_9deg.gif" path="oamass_npdata_9deg.gif" size="18499" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_ppdata_9deg.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454688211" name="oamass_ppdata_9deg.gif" path="oamass_ppdata_9deg.gif" size="23393" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_sigdata_9deg.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454688219" name="oamass_sigdata_9deg.gif" path="oamass_sigdata_9deg.gif" size="22214" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Revision 3
05 Feb 2016 - Main.SzymonHarabasz
Line: 1 to 1
 

Szymon's Personal Page

Changed:
<
<
  • k-factor calculated by simulating pairs with homogoneous distributions of mass, transverse momentum and rapidity, and then filtering them by single-leg acceptance matrices
    Now I change my mind slightly, the effect is visible also here and the reason, why it's so small might be different population of phase space in data and in this Pluto simulation
    kfac_white_mass.gif kfac_white_massoa.gif
  • ¿?Invariant mass signal with and without Piotr factor (for the record: spectra are corrected for single-leg efficiency /emb. to UrQMD /, the same k-factor is used in both cases, no sector factor was applied, PID was done with MLP weights No. 6)
    sig_corr_weight6_nofactorsVsPiotrFactor.gif
  • Combinatorial background from simulation (no corrections of fetch factors, Geant PID and reconstuction / identification cuts):
    bgr_sim.png missid_sim.png
>
>
  • k-factor calculated by simulating pairs with homogoneous distributions of mass, transverse momentum and rapidity, and then filtering them by single-leg acceptance matrices
    Now I change my mind slightly, the effect is visible also here and the reason, why it's so small might be different population of phase space in data and in this Pluto simulation
 
Added:
>
>
6 sectors active 6 sectors active 5 sectors active 4 sectors active
the missing ones next
to each other
4 sectors active
the missing ones
separatedby one good
4 sectors active
the missing ones are
opposite
kfac_white_mass.gif kfac_white_massoa.gif kfac_white_massoa_5sec.gif kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d0.gif kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d1.gif kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d2.gif
  • Invariant mass signal with and without Piotr factor (for the record: spectra are corrected for single-leg efficiency /emb. to UrQMD /, the same k-factor is used in both cases, no sector factor was applied, PID was done with MLP weights No. 6)
    sig_corr_weight6_nofactorsVsPiotrFactor.gif
  • Combinatorial background from simulation (no corrections of fetch factors, Geant PID and reconstuction / identification cuts):
    bgr_sim.png missid_sim.png

 
  • Signal from UrQMD, left: true cocktail, right: true signal and after subtracktion like-sign background.:
    sig_urqmd.png
Changed:
<
<
sig_true_likesign.png
>
>
sig_true_likesign.png

 
  • k-factor from mixing EXP and UrQMD, with and without the efficiency correction. Background in SIM with and without k-factor.:
    kfac_richQa10_MLP06_rawcorr_expsim.gif bgr_sim_knok.gif
Added:
>
>

Withhout k-factor:

mass_centrdep_nok.gif

integral_centrdep_pi0_nok.gifintegral_centrdep_midm_nok.gif

With k-factor

mass_centrdep.gif
 
Added:
>
>
integral_centrdep_pi0.gifintegral_centrdep_midm.gif

mass-pt:

+- mixing ++ mixing -- mixing geom. avg. mixing k-factor
masspt_npmix.gif masspt_ppmix.gif masspt_nnmix.gif masspt_avgmix.gif masspt_kfac.gif
+- data ++ data -- data geom. avg. data signal data
masspt_npdata.gif masspt_ppdata.gif masspt_nndata.gif masspt_avgdata.gif masspt_sigdata.gif

mass-opening angle

+- mixing ++ mixing -- mixing geom. avg. mixing k-factor
oamass_npmix.gif oamass_ppmix.gif oamass_nnmix.gif oamass_avgmix.gif oamass_kfac.gif
+- data ++ data -- data geom. avg. data signal data
oamass_npdata.gif oamass_ppdata.gif oamass_nndata.gif oamass_avgdata.gif oamass_sigdata.gif

pt-opening angle

+- mixing ++ mixing -- mixing geom. avg. mixing k-factor
oapt_npmix.gif oapt_ppmix.gif oapt_nnmix.gif oapt_avgmix.gif oapt_kfac.gif
+- data ++ data -- data geom. avg. data signal data
oapt_npdata.gif oapt_ppdata.gif oapt_nndata.gif oapt_avgdata.gif oapt_sigdata.gif
  -- SzymonHarabasz - 03 Feb 2016

META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_white_mass.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454512637" name="kfac_white_mass.gif" path="kfac_white_mass.gif" size="15110" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Line: 23 to 47
 
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="sig_corr_weight6_nofactorsVsPiotrFactor.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454512737" name="sig_corr_weight6_nofactorsVsPiotrFactor.gif" path="sig_corr_weight6_nofactorsVsPiotrFactor.gif" size="7187" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_richQa10_MLP06_rawcorr_expsim.gif" attr="" comment="k-factor from mixing EXP and UrQMD, with and without the efficiency correction. Background in SIM with and without k-factor." date="1454521892" name="kfac_richQa10_MLP06_rawcorr_expsim.gif" path="kfac_richQa10_MLP06_rawcorr_expsim.gif" size="29803" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="bgr_sim_knok.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454521956" name="bgr_sim_knok.gif" path="bgr_sim_knok.gif" size="16385" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Added:
>
>
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d2.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454675118" name="kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d2.gif" path="kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d2.gif" size="20924" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d1.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454675136" name="kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d1.gif" path="kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d1.gif" size="25095" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d0.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454675143" name="kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d0.gif" path="kfac_white_massoa_4sec_d0.gif" size="25196" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_white_massoa_5sec.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454675146" name="kfac_white_massoa_5sec.gif" path="kfac_white_massoa_5sec.gif" size="24664" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="mass_centrdep.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454675723" name="mass_centrdep.gif" path="mass_centrdep.gif" size="42417" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="mass_centrdep_nok.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454675739" name="mass_centrdep_nok.gif" path="mass_centrdep_nok.gif" size="41347" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_pi0.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454675762" name="integral_centrdep_pi0.gif" path="integral_centrdep_pi0.gif" size="9582" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_pi0_nok.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454675779" name="integral_centrdep_pi0_nok.gif" path="integral_centrdep_pi0_nok.gif" size="9594" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_midm.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454675791" name="integral_centrdep_midm.gif" path="integral_centrdep_midm.gif" size="10259" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="integral_centrdep_midm_nok.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454675806" name="integral_centrdep_midm_nok.gif" path="integral_centrdep_midm_nok.gif" size="9612" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="masspt_npmix.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454677965" name="masspt_npmix.gif" path="masspt_npmix.gif" size="16670" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_ppmix.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454678039" name="oamass_ppmix.gif" path="oamass_ppmix.gif" size="18113" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_nnmix.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454678047" name="oamass_nnmix.gif" path="oamass_nnmix.gif" size="16972" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="masspt_ppmix.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454678192" name="masspt_ppmix.gif" path="masspt_ppmix.gif" size="16824" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="masspt_nnmix.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454678197" name="masspt_nnmix.gif" path="masspt_nnmix.gif" size="16932" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="masspt_avgmix.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454678201" name="masspt_avgmix.gif" path="masspt_avgmix.gif" size="16837" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="masspt_kfac.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454678206" name="masspt_kfac.gif" path="masspt_kfac.gif" size="21322" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="masspt_npdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679034" name="masspt_npdata.gif" path="masspt_npdata.gif" size="16015" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="masspt_ppdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679038" name="masspt_ppdata.gif" path="masspt_ppdata.gif" size="17731" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="masspt_nndata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679044" name="masspt_nndata.gif" path="masspt_nndata.gif" size="17766" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="masspt_avgdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679049" name="masspt_avgdata.gif" path="masspt_avgdata.gif" size="17779" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="masspt_sigdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679052" name="masspt_sigdata.gif" path="masspt_sigdata.gif" size="18030" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_npdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679057" name="oamass_npdata.gif" path="oamass_npdata.gif" size="16667" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_ppdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679060" name="oamass_ppdata.gif" path="oamass_ppdata.gif" size="23112" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_nndata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679064" name="oamass_nndata.gif" path="oamass_nndata.gif" size="20773" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_avgdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679071" name="oamass_avgdata.gif" path="oamass_avgdata.gif" size="21913" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_sigdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679076" name="oamass_sigdata.gif" path="oamass_sigdata.gif" size="21437" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oapt_npdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679082" name="oapt_npdata.gif" path="oapt_npdata.gif" size="20523" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oapt_ppdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679086" name="oapt_ppdata.gif" path="oapt_ppdata.gif" size="27293" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oapt_nndata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679092" name="oapt_nndata.gif" path="oapt_nndata.gif" size="26702" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oapt_avgdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679097" name="oapt_avgdata.gif" path="oapt_avgdata.gif" size="26754" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oapt_sigdata.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454679101" name="oapt_sigdata.gif" path="oapt_sigdata.gif" size="22843" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_npmix.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454681067" name="oamass_npmix.gif" path="oamass_npmix.gif" size="17636" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_avgmix.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454681080" name="oamass_avgmix.gif" path="oamass_avgmix.gif" size="17545" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oamass_kfac.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454681084" name="oamass_kfac.gif" path="oamass_kfac.gif" size="35427" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oapt_npmix.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454681188" name="oapt_npmix.gif" path="oapt_npmix.gif" size="23459" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oapt_ppmix.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454681194" name="oapt_ppmix.gif" path="oapt_ppmix.gif" size="23608" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oapt_nnmix.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454681198" name="oapt_nnmix.gif" path="oapt_nnmix.gif" size="22747" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oapt_avgmix.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454681203" name="oapt_avgmix.gif" path="oapt_avgmix.gif" size="23396" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="oapt_kfac.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454681214" name="oapt_kfac.gif" path="oapt_kfac.gif" size="31360" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Revision 2
03 Feb 2016 - Main.SzymonHarabasz
Line: 1 to 1
 

Szymon's Personal Page

  • k-factor calculated by simulating pairs with homogoneous distributions of mass, transverse momentum and rapidity, and then filtering them by single-leg acceptance matrices
    Now I change my mind slightly, the effect is visible also here and the reason, why it's so small might be different population of phase space in data and in this Pluto simulation
    kfac_white_mass.gif kfac_white_massoa.gif
  • ¿?Invariant mass signal with and without Piotr factor (for the record: spectra are corrected for single-leg efficiency /emb. to UrQMD /, the same k-factor is used in both cases, no sector factor was applied, PID was done with MLP weights No. 6)
    sig_corr_weight6_nofactorsVsPiotrFactor.gif
Line: 8 to 8
  sig_urqmd.png sig_true_likesign.png
Added:
>
>
  • k-factor from mixing EXP and UrQMD, with and without the efficiency correction. Background in SIM with and without k-factor.:
    kfac_richQa10_MLP06_rawcorr_expsim.gif bgr_sim_knok.gif
  -- SzymonHarabasz - 03 Feb 2016

META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_white_mass.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454512637" name="kfac_white_mass.gif" path="kfac_white_mass.gif" size="15110" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="bgr_sim.png" attr="" comment="" date="1454512654" name="bgr_sim.png" path="bgr_sim.png" size="38171" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="missid_sim.png" attr="" comment="" date="1454512669" name="missid_sim.png" path="missid_sim.png" size="22498" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="sig_urqmd.png" attr="" comment="" date="1454512681" name="sig_urqmd.png" path="sig_urqmd.png" size="25140" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Changed:
<
<
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="sig_true_likesign.png" attr="" comment="" date="1454512695" name="sig_true_likesign.png" path="sig_true_likesign.png" size="26297" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
>
>
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="sig_true_likesign.png" attr="" comment="" date="1454521805" name="sig_true_likesign.png" path="sig_sim_knok.gif" size="18612" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="2"
 
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_white_massoa.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454512715" name="kfac_white_massoa.gif" path="kfac_white_massoa.gif" size="26305" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="sig_corr_weight6_nofactorsVsPiotrFactor.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454512737" name="sig_corr_weight6_nofactorsVsPiotrFactor.gif" path="sig_corr_weight6_nofactorsVsPiotrFactor.gif" size="7187" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
Added:
>
>
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="kfac_richQa10_MLP06_rawcorr_expsim.gif" attr="" comment="k-factor from mixing EXP and UrQMD, with and without the efficiency correction. Background in SIM with and without k-factor." date="1454521892" name="kfac_richQa10_MLP06_rawcorr_expsim.gif" path="kfac_richQa10_MLP06_rawcorr_expsim.gif" size="29803" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT attachment="bgr_sim_knok.gif" attr="" comment="" date="1454521956" name="bgr_sim_knok.gif" path="bgr_sim_knok.gif" size="16385" user="SzymonHarabasz" version="1"
 
This site is powered by FoswikiCopyright © by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding Hades Wiki? Send feedback
Imprint (in German)
Privacy Policy (in German)