[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