Difference between revisions of "TransverseAnalysisMeeting June 30 2020"
From PREX Wiki
(→Agenda) |
Ciprian Gal (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
== Agenda == | == Agenda == | ||
# PREX2 AT runs update: Ryan | # PREX2 AT runs update: Ryan | ||
| − | #* | + | #* RyR: working on respin 2 and focusing on the dithering analysis and slopes |
| + | #* RyR: the first look at the numbers it seems that the results are consistent for the most part with respin 1 | ||
| + | #* KP: for C, Pb the corrections are small, but for the Ca40 it's 4 times the uncertainty. | ||
| + | ## Respin 1 | ||
| + | ##* RyR: the Ca40 result after taking out the "frame" runs were closer to the C result | ||
| + | ##* RyR: will update plots for regression and dithering on the min | ||
# CREX AT runs update: Weibin & Robert | # CREX AT runs update: Weibin & Robert | ||
| − | #* | + | #* WZ: updated the Ca48 result with correct dithering slopes. We removed the problematic cycles for 2 runs and dithering and regression in good agreement. KP: we should understand what was wrong with those cycles. CC: the energy coils were not working for those. KP: we should document it (with the cycle plots). |
| + | #* WZ: a couple of other cycles show some outliers (they are still in the data). KP: you should look at the coil response in the data and see if some hardware was not working. DA: did we see such behaviour in the longitudinal running? CC: we saw some of of these in the regular running and we ended up throwing away those cycles. | ||
# CREX polarimetry results: Weibin | # CREX polarimetry results: Weibin | ||
| − | #* | + | #* WZ: got some results from Adam and Eric. |
| − | # Spin sign matching: Robert | + | #* WZ: Compton: took one slug on each side. |
| − | + | #* WZ: Moller: we can use and the Feb 8th data. KP: the spread in the data is fairly large. I'll check with Eric on this. | |
| + | #* WZ: remade the mul-plots for the AT runs with larger range and everything looks fine. KP: there is no correspondance between mini-run average and multiplet plots. This needs to be checked. WZ: will do. KK: We should make the DD plots to make sure that everything is ok. WZ: will do. | ||
| + | #* KK: we should have a table for the central values for the different quantities of interest. | ||
| + | # Spin sign matching: Robert [http://ace.phys.virginia.edu/HAPPEX/4157 haplog4157] | ||
| + | #* RoR: followed the procedure outlined by Bob. | ||
| + | #* RoR: included halogs for the different settings. | ||
| + | #* RoR: I don't have the horizontal precession calculator yet. | ||
| + | #* RoR: I will add what the Mott results to the log. | ||
| + | # CC: aggregator is working on the ifarm with dithering information already included in the japan tree. Plots should be easier to produce. | ||
| + | # KP: how are we going to aggregate this information? CG: will set up a table and share it with everyone by the end of the week. | ||
| + | |||
== Present == | == Present == | ||
| + | Devi A, Robert R, Ryan R, Ciprian G, Kent P, Robert R, Weibin Z, Paul K, Dustin M, David A, Caryn P, Cameron C, Juliette M, KK, Sakib R, | ||
[[Category:Meetings]] | [[Category:Meetings]] | ||
[[Category:AT Meetings]] | [[Category:AT Meetings]] | ||
Latest revision as of 14:57, 30 June 2020
Back to Main Page >> Transverse Analysis Meetings
previous meeting << >> next meeting
Logistic information
BlueJeans calling instructions: Bluejeans link: https://bluejeans.com/494002155
Agenda
- PREX2 AT runs update: Ryan
- RyR: working on respin 2 and focusing on the dithering analysis and slopes
- RyR: the first look at the numbers it seems that the results are consistent for the most part with respin 1
- KP: for C, Pb the corrections are small, but for the Ca40 it's 4 times the uncertainty.
- Respin 1
- RyR: the Ca40 result after taking out the "frame" runs were closer to the C result
- RyR: will update plots for regression and dithering on the min
- CREX AT runs update: Weibin & Robert
- WZ: updated the Ca48 result with correct dithering slopes. We removed the problematic cycles for 2 runs and dithering and regression in good agreement. KP: we should understand what was wrong with those cycles. CC: the energy coils were not working for those. KP: we should document it (with the cycle plots).
- WZ: a couple of other cycles show some outliers (they are still in the data). KP: you should look at the coil response in the data and see if some hardware was not working. DA: did we see such behaviour in the longitudinal running? CC: we saw some of of these in the regular running and we ended up throwing away those cycles.
- CREX polarimetry results: Weibin
- WZ: got some results from Adam and Eric.
- WZ: Compton: took one slug on each side.
- WZ: Moller: we can use and the Feb 8th data. KP: the spread in the data is fairly large. I'll check with Eric on this.
- WZ: remade the mul-plots for the AT runs with larger range and everything looks fine. KP: there is no correspondance between mini-run average and multiplet plots. This needs to be checked. WZ: will do. KK: We should make the DD plots to make sure that everything is ok. WZ: will do.
- KK: we should have a table for the central values for the different quantities of interest.
- Spin sign matching: Robert haplog4157
- RoR: followed the procedure outlined by Bob.
- RoR: included halogs for the different settings.
- RoR: I don't have the horizontal precession calculator yet.
- RoR: I will add what the Mott results to the log.
- CC: aggregator is working on the ifarm with dithering information already included in the japan tree. Plots should be easier to produce.
- KP: how are we going to aggregate this information? CG: will set up a table and share it with everyone by the end of the week.
Present
Devi A, Robert R, Ryan R, Ciprian G, Kent P, Robert R, Weibin Z, Paul K, Dustin M, David A, Caryn P, Cameron C, Juliette M, KK, Sakib R,
