Hi Bjorn, Now that the paper is out of the way I hope to start getting the calibration files for some of the later runs, but for now you may want to check that the si pedestals all look OK. I would expect the gains to be OK since we have not seen evidence of these changing significantly. I am surprised that the sum energy of the tiles doesn't give the "best" measure--if the tiles look strange I would again suspect the pedestals since these are known to drift significantly. ...steve Bjorn H Samset wrote: > In the interest of keeping this discussion going, here is a very brief > update on 22GeV dNdEta from TPM1. All this is still _very_ preliminary. > > I've looked at the different responses of the global detectors using what > calibrations I have (for run 4640, mostly), and the only one that looks > more or less reasonable at first glance is the Si array hits: > > http://folk.uio.no/bjornhs/brahms/22GeV/SiArrayHits_22GeV.ps > > I use this response "blindly" to select "most central" events - if this is > a very bad thing to do I'd appreciate some feedback. > > Again using the geant BB response (assuming 100% tube efficiency) to > normalize the number of events, but now doing a much better job of the > background subtraction: > > http://folk.uio.no/bjornhs/brahms/22GeV/dvf_z_fit.ps > > ...I get the following: > > dNdEta (eta=0) = 313 > > Getting closer. There are still some parts of the TPC-specific code that I > need to look into more closely, but I'd very much like to hear from > Steve/Hiro on the Si response - is this curve usable the way I'm doing - > i.e. just using the 200GeV calib blindly? > > Ping :-) > > -- > Bjorn H. Samset Phone: 22856465/92051998 > PhD student, heavy ion physics Adr: Schouterrassen 6 > Inst. of Physics, University of Oslo 0573 Oslo > \|/ > ----------------------------> -*- <----------------------------- > /|\
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Dec 04 2001 - 12:02:06 EST