> The checking that we have done indicates that while the cluster vertex indeed > finds many more vertices than the track vertex ( I guess this is what > you mean by > 'efficient'), Yes - what I meant was loosely that it finds more vertices over a wider z-interval plus shows a narrower correlation with BB - see below. >in something like 25% of events (at least for run2535) > the cluster vertex Z > is not correlated with the BB Z. I think that this means that you > should not only check that > the vertex is found, but also should check that, say, BB and Cluster > (or track, or whatever) are consistent. Indeed - this is on the "to-do"-list. The reason why it is not included yet is 1) that I do not know what consistency we should demand. I would be very glad if you have done some work on this :-) and 2) that I am working on figuring out what goes wrong in these 25% of the events... This is way to much to be random errors (I think), so it looks like the thing just sometimes picks the wrong peak. Analysis of this is underways. I hope that I will at least be able to tell _when_ something goes wrong so that the "background" in the corr. with BB will go away. Ping :-) ------------------------------------------------ Bjorn H. Samset Master-student in Heavy Ion physics Mob: +47 92 05 19 98 Office: +47 22 85 77 62 Adr: Kri 2A709 Sognsveien 218 0864 Oslo
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 08 2000 - 09:37:41 EST