High Pt analysis

From: Claus O. E. Jorgensen (ekman@nbi.dk)
Date: Sun Jul 07 2002 - 22:13:53 EDT

  • Next message: Dieter Rohrich: "Re: ratios 3.04"

    Hi Brahmers,
    
    I've updated my high pt web page (http://www.nbi.dk/~ekman/highpt/highpt.html).
    It contains more or less what I plan to show at qm. I still need to make
    the plot nicer to look at, but I think it should be possible to tell a
    good physics story from these plots. 
    
    I'm not sure about the pt ratio (0-10)/(40-60) for pions at y=2.2. If I
    make the plot from the raw pt distributions (directly from the dst) I get
    the ratio shown on the web-page, but if I do the full analysis with the
    acceptance corrections I see a very strong decrease from around
    pt=1.5GeV/c. I suspect it comes from the way the zeros are treated (if one
    wants to merge 5 bins into 1 bin and 3 of them contains 0+-0, what is the
    correct way of doing this).
    
    Cheers,
    
    Claus
    
    PS: Flemming, I have a few comments to your comments, see below...
    
    PPS: The next week I'll be on the Faroe Island, and my internet acces will
    probably be limited - but comments or suggestions (that doesn't require
    many hours of analysis work) are still very welcome.
    
    
    +-------------------------------------------------------------+
    | Claus Jørgensen                                             |
    | Cand. Scient.                  Phone  : (+45) 33 32 49 49   |
    |                                Cell   : (+45) 27 28 49 49   |
    | Niels Bohr Institute, Ta-2,    Office : (+45) 35 32 53 07   |
    | Blegdamsvej 17, DK-2100,       E-mail : ekman@nbi.dk        |
    | University of Copenhagen       Home   : www.nbi.dk/~ekman/  |
    +-------------------------------------------------------------+
    
    On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Flemming Videbaek wrote:
    
    > Dear Claus,
    > 
    > Thanks for the hard work and posting the results, this is precisiely the
    > kind of data that we I thought we could get out of the long runs at 90 and
    > 12 deg;
    > 
    > - since people are getting up in the US you will get another set of comment
    > suggestions etc.  (and more later it is a lab holiday though some folks are
    > in )
    > 
    > My first comments basically do not take into account too much of the other
    > comments
    > so there may be some  overlap.
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > > The main physics plots will be
    > >
    > > - (h++h-)/2 pt spectra for 0-5, 5-10, 10-20 and ~40-60% centrality at
    > >   eta=0.
    > >
    > Since the 40-60% comes from the non-trigger 6 events and the statistics does
    > not look too
    > bad it should be possible to get another bin say from 20-40 to extend the
    > systematics, in particular
    > if you make the powerlaw fits showing the n, and pt0 , and the <pt> from the
    > powerlaw shape.
    > Since this centrality region overlap with the trigger 6 the scale-down
    > factors and trigger mix has to be treated correctly.
    
    I wouldn't know how to do this. If one vetos he trigger 6 I guess it bias
    the data towards more peripheral events - if not, I guess it goes the
    other way. Is there a clever way around this.
    
    >
    > > - pt ratio (R) of central (0-10) to semi-peripheral (~40-60). Here I
    > >   conlude that we our measurements indicate a suppression of high pt
    > >   particles when comparing central to semi-peripheral collisions - this
    > >   comparison is of course independent on fit ranges and reference data
    > >   taken with another experiment.
    > >
    > > - ratios of spectra to p+pbar reference (ua1) data. These ratios are
    > >   dependent on the choice of reference data and fit ranges/methods.
    > >   However, suppression of high pt hadrons is observed and it is more
    > >   pronounced for the central collisions.
    > >
    > > - ratios of protons to all hadrons as function of pt. Mesonic vs. baryonic
    > >   jets??? Who knows about this stuff? Is my result reasonalbe (I just
    > >   pulled out the numbers)?
    > Did you do 'asymmetric pid at p>3.5 GeV for the protons and the
    > corresponding increased accpt?
    > Otherwise I think the  p-bar/p are contaminated by kaons.
    
    You're right - I' updated this figure and I'm not looking at p>3.5GeV/c.
    
    > >
    > > - pi- spectrum at y approx 2.2 for 0-15% central. The statistics are
    > >   unfortunately not good enough to make qualitative statements on the
    > >   slope at high pt.
    > 
    > I think you should also make the h- spectra at this setting. For pt >=1 the
    > h- and pi-
    > can then be compared e.g. looking both directly at the data, and comparing.
    > This may help us dis-entangle the 'flat' plot of 0-10/(40-60).
    > Is this due to using identified pions, thus removing the possible fake high
    > pt- suppression
    > from the large inverse slope p-bar, and k-.
    > 
    > The y~2 should be binned in at least 250Mev/C bins, there are too many 1 and
    > 2
    > counts out there.
    > The overlap between setttings looks good.
    > Could you also show us the 'raw' 40-60 spectrum . I know the statistics is
    > not good so
    > but even merged into the .5 GeV p(t) bins as you do in the final ratio plot
    > it is useful to judge the
    > significance (It looks form the ratio and errors that the last 3 bins has 4
    > , 2/3 and 1 count respectively).
    > 
    > 
    > -- Could someone else look into an estimate of Npart/Nbinary for the 40-60
    > selection for the way the selection
    > was done here. I we want to attempt to do the sigma/R(AA) we need such
    > numbers, and it is a sure question from the
    > audience.
    > 
    > Again, thanks for the plots
    >     Flemming
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > 
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jul 07 2002 - 22:14:28 EDT