Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Energy spectrum MeV  DATA (solid) vs MC (dots)   spectrum    

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Energy spectrum MeV  DATA (solid) vs MC (dots)   spectrum    "— Presentation transcript:

1 Energy spectrum MeV  DATA (solid) vs MC (dots)   spectrum    

2 Energy spectrum MeV  DATA (solid) vs MC (dots)   spectrum    

3 MeV Energy spectrum  DATA (solid) vs MC (dots)   spectrum    

4 Kcrash DBV-18 (M.Antonelli, T.Spadaro, M. Testa)   CRA ( 100 MeV )  CRA ( 200 MeV )  CRA ( 300 MeV ) data 0.3350  0.0002 0.2231  0.0002 0.1198  0.0001 MC old 0.1709  0.0001 0.0839  0.0001 0.0407  0.0001 MC new 0.3337  0.0007 0.1823  0.0005 0.0742  0.0004 (last-1) (0.996) (0.82) (0.62) MC new 0.357  0.002 0.228  0.002 0.110  0.002 (last) (1.07) (1.02) (0.92) Data /MC comparison for Kcrash efficiency given a K S     tag

5 Effect of hardware effi on      acceptance old MC: 0.6338  0.0001 new MC: 0.6305  0.0003 t0 from pions given a K S      tag t 01 OR t 02 t 01 =t 02 t 01  t 02 only one t 0 data 0.9916  0.0001 0.7504  0.0006 0.0737  0.0004 0.1759  0.0005 MC old 0.9952  0.0009 0.7013  0.0006 0.1438  0.0005 0.1549  0.0005 MC new 0.9945  0.0002 0.773  0.001 0.0683  0.0006 0.1589  0.0009

6 Effect of accidentals on      acceptance Stolen-t 0 probability r T (cm)  K3K3 K e3     acceptance computed with (blue filled dots) and without accidentals (blue open dots): overall 1% loss DC EMC ? K e3 K  3               reg nucl

7 Stolen-t 0 : data vs MC comparison (work in progress) data MC  t 0 (ns) Probability of accidental t0 evaluated on K S     + K L neutral vtx with L K >100 cm, using a)  t 0 = t 0 golden - t 0 tracks <0 (purity ~ 0.717) b) t 0 clu  K S and K L clusters (purity 0.723) data MC a) (8.7  0.1) 10 -3 (12.9  0.1) 10 -3 b) (8.2  0.1) 10 -3 (14.5  0.1) 10 -3 + 50% of accidental clusters?

8 MeV MC (solid) data (dots) Energy spectrum  t 0 < 0 Need to check the energy spectrum in slices of  t 0 to see if there is a sizeable contribution of residual  splittings

9 Systematics in prompt clusters counting E CRA accidentals K L 1 pro 100 MeV.00407 .00003.00420 .00003 200 MeV.00408 .00004.00369 .00004 300 MeV.00410 .00006.00375 .00006 events with  3 prompts AND Kcrash data MC MC ( trigger unbiased) (  clu (data)/  clu (MC) corr.) 3 pro 0.3667  0.0007 0.3630  0.0008 0.3781  0.0008 4 pro 0.6257  0.0007 0.6307  0.0008 0.6158  0.0008 5 pro ( 7.3  0.1) 10 -3 ( 6.2  0.1) 10 -3 ( 6.0  0.1) 10 -3  6 pro (1.2  0.2) 10 -4 (1.5  0.2) 10 -4 (1.3  0.2) 10 -4 data vs MC comparison (E CRA >300 MeV) background

10 Accidental vs splittings in 5 prompt events dataMC couple of photons with minimum distance: E min vs dist f acci (data) = 0.155  0.004 accidentals splittings accidentals splittings f acci (MC) = 0.42  0.01 cm MeV prob(split)= f split n 5 / (4 n 4 ): (2.5  0.1) 10 -3 (1.4  0.1) 10 -3 data MC


Download ppt "Energy spectrum MeV  DATA (solid) vs MC (dots)   spectrum    "

Similar presentations


Ads by Google