[Brahms-l] BRAHMS/ Minutes of analysis meeting.

     Dear Friends,
          We had a useful meeting today, see http://indico.cern.ch/ 
conferenceDisplay.py?confId=11263 . Please read all QM06 proceedings.


Here is my attempt at minutes.
Michael

BRAHMS Analysis Meeting 18 Janurary 2007

Steve, Truls, Dipali, Selemon, Michael, Hon Yan, JH, Ramero, Hans,
Catalin, Pawel.

Action Items:
=============

Hongyan will try to reconcile her analysis of net protons with  
Flemmings.
This will probably mean that she will be somewhat late in submitting  
her proceedings.

JH will write up his proceedings very soon.

Ian's family is sick so we will have to wait for his proceedings.





Truls: Comparison of Brahms to Phobos.

At 62GeV there exists a difference in the # of binary collisions  
calculated for
different centrality regions, particularly for central collisions.

cent |N
bin PHOBOS| Nbin BRAHMS
45-50% | 85+-14       | 76+-19
35-45% | 136+-22     | 123+-27
25-35% | 240+-30     | 210+-40
15-25% | 402+-36     | 355+-60
6-15%  | 643+-48     | 580+-85
0-6 %   | 883+-65     | 813+-100
       cent |N
bin PHOBOS| Nbin BRAHMS
35-40%  | 33+-5         | 34+-7
25-35%  | 49+-6         | 48+-8
15-25%  | 80+-7         | 78+-5
   6-15%  | 125+-9       | 118+-17
   0-6  %  | 170+-12     | 150+-12

There is a difference in slope between our spectra & those of phobos.

Steve thinks that for 62GeV CuCu we will need to do some checks on  
multiplicity.


Hongyan Yang: d-Au at 4degrees
She has recovered a significant number of runs below 8307, see  
appendix of her talk.
Hon Yang has succeeded in getting useful information out of H1 and H2
mass^2 at least for low field. When using the RICH she takes note of  
the how the refractive index changes.
She has a nice matching of spectra at y=3 and no change in slope for  
the kaon spectrum. Hongyan things that the reason for the improvement  
is better PID.

JH reported FVs comment on proceedings. He says that their is a  
factor of 2 difference between her analysis and Flemming's. Currently  
she is only quoting a 15% systematic error. This seems too small  
until we reconcile the analysis? What should we do? Should we average  
the two analysis or can we do at least a partial reconcilliation.  
Hongyan will work on this for next week.

Hans has redone the 62GeV stopping analysis. He has written a note  
and set up spectra at http://www.nbi.dk/~canute/. Please read his  
note. His results are consistent with Ionots.

Catalin
MRS Efficiency for AuAu_at_200 (05') 	Catalin Ristea (NBI)
Estimates of the TPC efficiency with reference tracks method.
TPM1 seems to have no dependence on the centrality
There is some dependence of the TPM2 efficiency on centrality. Pawel  
suggested that this could be due to a changing fraction of background  
tracks in the reference sample.
JH is the reference correct. For very peripheral events shouldn't  
TPM1 have 100% efficiency?

JH got postponed to next week. Please look at his slides that he will  
put into his quark matter proceedings.
Next week the meeting is on Friday 9.30 BNL time.




Michael Murray 18 January 2007


_______________________________________________
Brahms-l mailing list
Brahms-l_at_lists.bnl.gov
http://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/brahms-l