Hi Bjorn,
Just a few comments on your note (AnNote#23).
- Looking at Fig.4 in the report of Claus and Christian (AnNote#22),
one can see clearly that around the nominal intersection point
there is no significant dependence of Mcut on the vertex (all
histograms and curves are absolutely flat). Therefore, I would
expect that both centrality recipes (JH and NBI) should give
exactly the same results if a narrow cut is imposed on the vertex.
It would be therefore very nice if you could compare the results
(centrality dependence of dN/deta) using both methods under
(for example) a +-5cm vertex cut (statistics should be sufficient,
in my old analysis I even used +-3cm).
- <Npart> does'nt depend linearly on centrality (I am not sure
that this is a few percent effect for all centrality cuts!).
I don't know how this would affect the results but it is clear
that it should be done more carefully. One can calculate <Npart>
directly from Glauber model (or any other geometrical model).
In your note, you say that <Npart> should come from simulating
the tiles. This is not really clear to me! All what you need
to calculate <Npart> is the percent of the cross section
for a given centrality cut and a geometrical model (Glauber
for example).
Is Reference 1 available somewhere on the WEB ?
Cheers,
Fouad
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fouad RAMI e-mail : fouad.rami@ires.in2p3.fr
IReS phone : 33.(0)3.88.10.62.00
23,rue du Loess : 33.(0)3.88.10.64.55
B.P.28-BAT.20 (secretary's office)
67037 STRASBOURG CEDEX 2 fax : 33.(0)3.88.10.66.14
FRANCE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Fri, 16 Feb 2001, Bjorn H Samset wrote:
>
> Hello everyone :-)
>
> I have on behalf of the Oslo group just added BRAHMS Analysis Note #23 to
> the usual web-page. It contains another iteration in the analysis of
> centrality dependent dN/dEta from TPM1, and we now present a fully
> corrected dN/dEta per part. pair that is consistent both in shape and
> absolute value with the measurements presented by PHOBOS and PHENIX. This
> does not mean that the analysis is finished - many details still have to
> be worked out - but we believe now that it will be ready for inclusion in
> the upcoming dN/dEta paper. Have a look :-)
>
> Also, the major "breakthrough" was the new centrality presented a few days
> ago by Claus and Christian. Thanks guys, great work :-)
>
> On a tech note, I'm not allowed to edit ban.bib. Christian, could you open
> it for us? Here, for ref., is the bibtex-data: (Also note that the title
> of your BAN22 is wrong in ban.bib!)
>
> @TechReport{ban23,
> author = {Bj{\o}rn H. Samset and Truls M. Larsen and Trine
> S. Tveter},
> title = {Centrality dependent $dN/d\eta$ at $\eta=0$},
> institution = OSLO,
> year = {2001},
> OPTkey = {},
> type = BAN,
> number = {23},
> OPTaddress = {},
> month = {February},
> OPTnote = {},
> OPTannote = {}
> }
>
> 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 : Tue Feb 20 2001 - 05:09:01 EST