Re: distinguishing single end hits from non-shower hits

["Kornicer, Mihajlo" <mikornic@indiana.edu>]

Hi Blake,

if a hit originated from the middle of the counter it would probably be 
seen by both ends. I would assign a single-end hit to the nearby 
same-end cluster with the appropriate energy adjustment, otherwise 
discard it.

In the case when several clusters can claim a hit, you will have to 
decide how to share hit-energy depending on energies and positions of 
nearby clusters. You can probably use some Monte Carlo shower profiles 
in making decision, but that might be an overhead.
If you decide not to share but just to glue a hit to the best 
candidate, you would need to check weather you skew the pi0 mass.

Again, you need to see if the inclusion of single-end hits is the first 
or higher-order correction to the energy resolution, especially for low 
energy photons.

Cheers,
Mihajlo

Quoting "Mark M. Ito" <marki@jlab.org>:

> Blake,
>
> For t and z I would just assume that the hit came from the middle of
> the counter. For these hits, the tolerance for inclusion in a cluster
> in these dimensions would have to be much looser than for
> double-ended hits or you will include them only very rarely.
>
>  -- Mark
>
> Blake Leverington wrote:
>> Hey all,
>>
>> Ok, so I was thinking of ways to go about adding the single-ended
>> hits back into the cluster, but how does one distinguish which
>> cluster a hit would belong to since we now have no time information
>> to determine if it belongs to a cluster or not, or which cluster if
>> there is more than one nearby. We have x,y and E, but no t or z to
>> put it with a cluster.
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>> -Blake
>
>