Dear Hiro,
the plots look very nice. I also think they look more
symetric. Could you plot the ratio of negative Eta to positive
eta versus |eta|. Also what do the errors represent on the first
plot? Since the points are so smooth the error bars seem too
large to be independent from point to point. Do they represent
some set of (mostly) common systematic errors?
I didn't see a prediction for 5-10% central. Do you have it?
Finally it would be nice to see the limiting fragmenation plot
comparing your 200 and 130GeV data.
Well done!!!
MIchael
PS Who is the paper committee?
Quoting Hironori Ito <hito@students.phsx.ukans.edu>:
> Hello. I made new 4 dndeta figures with new calibration. They
> are still preliminary, so you are not allowed to show them outside of
> the
> collaboration without the consent of the spokes person. However, it is
> good enough for some people to start discussing a more detail of our
> new
> paper. The files are located in
> "http://pii3.brahms.bnl.gov/~hito/dndeta/2001"
>
> Here is the list of 4 figures.
> 1. dndeta_all.gif
> dndeta for 6 centrality cuts by average of silicon and beam beam.
>
> 2. dndeta_part.gif
> dndeta par participant pair for 6 centrality cuts by average of
> silicon and beam beam.
>
> 3. dndeta_sym.gif
> symetrized dndeta for 6 centrality cuts with the prediction by
> Khazeev and Levin(dash-dot line)
>
> 4. dndeta_part_ybeam.gif
> dndeta shifted by ybeam (shown only 0-5 % and 30-40%)
>
>
> hiro
>
> (Note: Tiles are not included in the figures, but they are still used
> for
> centrality and overall normalization. I am still having trouble
> matching
> Tiles to Si and BB.)
>
Michael Murray, Cyclotron TAMU, 979 845 1411 x 273, Fax 1899
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Oct 10 2001 - 04:04:32 EDT