Analysis Diary

2020.3

3.22

20200320.pdf

3.20

• Make a code to output text data from tree in ana/getHist/temp/tree2text/ --> H2random.seed is created from random data

3.17 Kyoto-JLab meeting

• Check Convention of Analyzer

ELS_20200317.pdf

3.12 ELS meeting

• Gogami's analysis nnl exp. charge T2: 13.7325 C H2: 2.4925 C H22: 0.918943 C He3: 1.01324 C

3.10 Kyoto-JLab meeting

• aaa

3.5 ELS meeting

• Comparison between data and geant4
• Λ and Σ --> Comment) Adjust with using tale --> Λ is same, but Σ is not same? --> Due to acceptance?
• nnΛ --> Not same --> Magnet strength? Fermi motion? --> Comment) Use Fermi motion with data. What is binding region?

ELS_20200305.pdf

3.2

• Missing mass distribution about seed was created. -> Missing mass distribution highly depend on D magnet strength. -> D magnet dependence was studied.
• First, Q magnet dependence of missing mass distribution when D magnet is fixed should be checked.

2020.2

2.28

• Real data and geant4 are compared. --> Missing mass, momentum distribution --> About H2 Missing mass, air is important to make the region between $\Lambda$ and $\Sigma$. --> About T2 Missing mass, $\Sigma$ should be important. ----> Not match with data. Strange ? ----> High pe, pk -> low missing mass ----> Low pe, pk -> high missing mass
• Acceptance become narrower when including physics --> Why? Should be checked.
• Distribution of Event Generator --> Fermi motion make distribution wider --> $\Sigma$ contamination increase, however I don't know this effect is large, or not.

20200228.pdf

2019.12

12.30

• TARG simulation is too high cost -> Calculation time is too large --> Energy cut 1.0 GeV (TARGSteppingAction.cc) -->

12.22

• Make Q1 magnet table for electron with H kinematics. -> File Name: SOS_Q1_forH-e.table -> See the following presentation
• Incorporate SOS Q1 geometry in geant4 simulation -> It was hard to fix bug but fixed. -> the reason is IsInside() function (In this function, unknown variable was used.)

12.01

• TOSCA SOS Q1
• I don't know a unit of Current density. -> A/mm^2 is reasonable. ->Should set "SI with mm" when create analysis database.
• I don't know bh curve. -> Material is AISI1004 or AISI1006

2019.10

10.19

• PCSM and Dipole strength is studyed.

20191019.pdf

10.16

• PCSM is incorporated in geant4 . -> Notice: unit, positon to be checked.
• PCSM and Dipole strength is now being studied. -> only central ray should be used to determine the strength

20191016.pdf

10.13

• S2 was incorporated in geant4 simulation. -> Variation of acceptance is very small.
• TS for E70ELPH was reexamined. -> Resolution about 7.01 ch was achieved.

20191013.pdf

10.12

• Time resolution of Trigger Scintirator for E70 ELPH experiment has examined.
• 2DGraph for geant4 simulation is made.

20191012.pdf

10.11

• Maruhadaka with no cherencov cut is done. -> h2_nogaschecut.root
• I studyed K+ survival ratio about h2_nochecut.root. -> Checked AC1, AC2 and Gasche.
• Bishun tells me that geometrical information, for example S2, is written in replay/DB.

20191011.pdf

10.10

• I studied K survival ratio with AC scan. -> I found that the used data has already cut when maruhadaka was done. -> To be retryed with modifyed maruhadaka.

10.08

• I studied nnL geant4 acceptance by comparing experiment and simulation
• The best result by Geant4 is Q1: -0.062 and Q2: 0.019 -> XFP vs YFP is inconsistent with data. -> Q1: -0.062 and Q1: 0.018 seems to be better. -> However, an acceptance of simulation is larger than that of data.
• So, I set acceptance cut of focal plain in the Geant4 simulation. -> The result is close to the NIM. -> This was wrong. (cut condition was wrong (after P8[20191008]).) -> I need to check the acceptance, especially trigger detector.

20191008.pdf

10.05

• Parameter scan is done with T2 target. -> The parameters are close to H2 target.
• Comparison geant4 simulation with nnl data

20191005.pdf

10.04

Geant4 nnL

• Now, Q1 = 0.062 T/cm and Q2 = 0.019 T/cm is best setting.

• The dependence of Q1 and Q2 collimator are examined.

  -> Without collimator; FWHM = $2.56\times 10^{-4}$ and $\Delta \Omega = 9.5 msr$ -> Q1col:12, Q2col:18; FWHM = $2.08\times 10^{-4}$ and $\Delta \Omega = 6.0 msr$ (the result is close to NIM)

nnL analysis

• I study the BG between Λ and Σ. -> This may come from Al
• When the Al quasi-free is scaled, the shape of Al quasi-free and that of BG between Λ and Σ are very close.
• However, determination of the scale factor is difficult and more study is needed.

20191004.pdf

10.03

• Width of Missing Mass is getting narrower (Due to the error of SetBranchAddress)!!
• I want to know the reason where the BG between $\Lambda$ and $\Sigma$ come from? --> BG comes from H2_Accidental + AL(without AL_Accidental)?
• First, I want to estimate whether the side-band BG estimation is good or not ?
• However, the statistic of Al data of h2_20190927.root is low and I need to add T2_20190927.root and h22_20190927.root.
• So, I need to determine the cut condition with h22 and T2.

20191003.pdf

10.02

• Colimation is studied, but small collimator (eg, Q1col12, Q2col20,etc) is meaningless.
• Geant4 simulation Around Q1:0.05-0.07 and Q2:0.015-0.025 is started.
• scanning.cc is modified -> Setting Maget Value becomes easier.

20191002.pdf

10.01

• Missing mass is too broad in my calculation
• nnL Geant4 without colimatorare studied.
• Around Q1:0.05-0.07 and Q2:0.015-0.025 is good.

20191001.pdf

2019.9

9.29

• H2 data which Toshi upload(h2_20190927.root) is checked.
• coin time is very good ($\sigma = 325.8\ \rm{ps}$) and almost zero background.
• Missing mass is very broad so some correction will be needed

20190929.pdf

9.28

• Geant4 HRS for nnL is checked and the picture is uploaded to memo

• Central Momentum is a little bit of large.

  $\to$ adjusted to 2.22 GeV/c

• Geant4 Runs without raster are started

• Q magnet is Kato-equation

20190928.pdf

9.27

• TGraphを定義する際、

  1
  TGraph* g = new TGraph(N); 
  

  だとうまくいくが、

  xxxxxxxxxx
  2
  1
  TGraph* g;
  2
  g = Set(N);
  

  だとうまくいかない。何で？ Segmentaiton Faultになる

• cut conditionをscanして確かめるためのScannin.Cを作成した

• Scanning.Cを用いてH2dataに対して最適なcut条件を決定した

20190927.pdf

9.25

• Understanding how to use maruhadaka.cc
• Making root files with maruhadaka for H2 and T2