[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Addressing eta pi0 resolution diffs




Hi Mihajlo and Alex,

I've revised a bit the discussion of eta and pi0 mass resolution.  In  
Figure 11 now I only show the dependence as a function of momentum (to  
avoid confusion with what follows in the text).

Then for the gamma p -> eta pi^0 p I add a little more info (supplied  
by MK) on the reconstructed resolutions.  This is summarized in a  
Table and followed up with this statement (reword if desired):

The noticeable difference between the BCAL and the FCAL resolutions is  
due primarily to the follow two effects.  First, for the physics  
channel simulated, the BCAL detects on average lower energy photons  
than the FCAL, and therefore the energy resolution of these photons  
will be relatively poorer.  Second, at high energies, past  
experimental experience suggests that the ``floor" or constant term in  
the resolution ($B$ in Equation~\ref{eq:eres}) dominates.  This term,  
related to systematic errors in reconstruction, is significantly  
smaller in our MC simulation than has been achievable with actual data  
in the past.  Therefore, at this stage of our simulation, the energy  
resolution for these higher energy FCAL photons is probably too good.

Basically I think this covers us if people compare the opening section  
and Alex's plots to what appears in this part of the document. So  
there is one "real difference" (kinematics, Alex accounts for this in  
his sim) and one "artificial difference" that is that our sim of FCAL  
has no floor term.

Note also that Alex is probably using radphi statistical term in his  
projections (as he should be since his section is about what we  
anticipate).  Our sim uses effectively the smaller statistical term  
based on enhanced photocoupling.

-Matt