Update:Run1 vs Run2 CC inc &

First look at Water-out/Water-in

Erez Reinherz-Aronis and Rajarshi Das

(w/ Walter Toki)

May 9, 2011

1

Outlook

• Samples and POTs

• Bunch structure

• Run1 vs Run2Run 1: Data vs MCp4Run 2: Data vs MCp4MCp4: Run1 vs Run2Data: Run1vs Run2

• Water-out/Water-inData: Ratio Water-out/Water-in vs expectation

2

   (from files header)

  Total DQ MCp4

Run1 water 3.09x1019 2.99x1019 5.56x1020

Run2 water 6.98x1019 4.36x1019 6.13x1020

Sum 1.00x1020 7.35x1019 11.7x1020

Samples and POTs

3

• DQ sample were used• CC Inclusive Selection:

Highest momentum negative charge track in a bunchBegins in the P0D (no TPC pulls cut)

Bunch timing

4

Run1:Run 31 → 34

Run 36

Run2:Run 37→38

• Run2 has Double-Triple bunch structure

• 1st = Run36; 2nd, 3rd = Run37/8

Run 2

Run 1

Run1 vs Run2

Run 1: Data vs MCp4Run 2: Data vs MCp4MCp4: Run1 vs Run2Data: Run1vs Run2

5

Run1 Data vs MCp4CC inc - X, Y, Cosθ, φ

6Normalized by POT

Run1 Data vs MCp4Z, Neg Trk Momentum

7

• Normalized by POT• Start position of Highest momentum Neg. Trk in the P0D• The dashed lines represent the water-target limits

Run2 Data vs MCp4CC inc - X, Y, Cosθ, φ

8Normalized by POT

Run2 Data vs MCp4Z, Neg Trk Momentum

9

• Normalized by POT• Data/MCp4 = 8273/8521 = 0.97±0.02

MCp4 Run1 vs Run2CC inc - X, Y, Cosθ, φ

10

Run1 waterRun2 water

Normalized by POT

Mcp4 Run1 vs Run2Z, Neg Trk Momentum

11

• Normalized by POT• Run1/Run2 = 111955/108661 = 1.030±0.004

usEcal usWT cWT cEcal

Run1/Run2 0.998 1.013 1.027 1.064

Stat. Error 0.015 0.008 0.006 0.009

Data Run1 vs Run2CC inc - X, Y, Cosθ, φ

12

Run1 waterRun2 water

Normalized by POT

Data Run1 vs Run2Z, Neg Trk Momentum

13

• Normalized by POT• Run1/Run2 = 6062/5673 = 1.07±0.02

usEcal usWT cWT cEcal

Run1/Run2 0.99 1.08 1.08 1.05

Stat. Error 0.07 0.04 0.03 0.04

Z distribution checks: XY

14X

Beam position and direction

Run1 waterRun2 water

Normalized by POT

Water-out/Water-in

Data ratio vs expectation

15

   (from files header)

  Total DQ

Run1 water 3.09x1019 2.99x1019

Run2 water 6.98x1019 4.36x1019

Sum 1.00x1020 7.35x1019

     

Run2 air 1.79x1019 1.77x1019

Samples and POTs

16

• DQ sample were used

Data CC inc: X, Y, Cosθ, φ

17

Run1Run2 waterRun2 air

Normalized by POT

Data CC inc: Neg Trk Momentum

18

• Run1• Run2 water• Run2 air

• Normalized by POT

• Note: Run2 air is reconstructed as water

• No TPC pull used

Z position distributions

19

• Start position of Highest momentum Neg. Trk in the P0D• The dashed lines represent the water-target limits

Run1 3588Run2 water 3358Run2 air 2573

Run1/Run2 = 1.07±0.02

Water-out/Water-in ratio

20

• Water-target measured ration 0.70±0.02 • Expected ration from material list: 0.68• Dashed lines are the water-target limits

0.94±0.09 0.70±0.02 0.94±0.05

Summary• Run1 vs Run 2:

MCp4 Run1/Run2 ~3% higherData Run1/Run2 ~7% higherMaybe there is some Z difference (within limit stat.)

• Water-out/Water-in ratio measured 70 ± 2 % (expect 68 %)

• Future plans:Data/MC ratio vs P0DulesMCp4 – study TPC pulls

21

Update:Run1 vs Run2 CC inc &

First look at Water-out/Water-in

Erez Reinherz-Aronis and Rajarshi Das

(w/ Walter Toki)

May 9, 2011

22

Backup• (General) ND280 Fiducial

-1060 < X < 1008 [mm]

-1085 < Y < 1110 [mm]

-3190 < Z < 5000 [mm]

• P0D Fiducial-1038 < X < 995 [mm]

-1060 < Y < 1100 [mm]

-3190 < Z < -980 [mm]

23