Re: Update

[Brendan Kiburg <kiburg@mu03.npl.uiuc.edu>]

Hi Peter,
  Thanks for the comments.  I made an error in a cut and paste and ended
up pileup protecting on mu-hi twice.  I fixed that and updated the same
webpage, so you guys can take a look.  The mu-lo cut is now 3-5% , but it
does not eliminate the
remaining background.  It is perfectly possible that it is beam electrons
and the muSC just doesn't see it.  I'll go to the higher level code and
implement a flagging technique so we can take full advantage of the muPC
and muSCA PP as well.

  Thanks,
   Brendan

On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Peter Kammel wrote:

> Dear Brendan,
> 
> Thanks for the very interesting update. Many things make sense now.
> When taking the data, we had your fig.1 on the online display. From
> that, I was optimistic that the delayed kicker effect would not
> be much troubles. We only need a factor of 500 or so of mu rejection
> from our entrance counters, and the correlated time structure
> should disappear in the flat accidentals. That's what your fig 2,3
> demonstrate.
> 
> For the gondola only, we are more affected by the beam electrons, probably
> they dominate the remaining background. This does not show in your 
> comparision of PP muSChi / muSClo. But your fig 1 and 2 are 
> identical !? The previous 2 and 3 are also identical. I'm doubt
> your mSClo PP is working.
> 
> I think we can afford to take a shift with this settings. 4h mu-, 4h mu+,
> to have a quasi direct measurement of our background.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Peter
> 
> On Wed, 14 Jun 2006, Brendan Kiburg wrote:
> 
> > Hello all,
> >   I made some changes to the raw analysis based on advice from
> > Steve.  Please see my analysis page, June 14th link for new information
> > about the background.  In particular, Steve's recommendation of looking at
> > eSC only electrons has produced plots that show something along the lines
> > of the structure we expect from the kicker.  I am referring specfically to
> > the time, and not the exact shape.
> > 
> >   I think we need to improve the statistics, and that it looks promising
> > that we can identify our background with this method. More thought will be
> > needed to translate this study into a background for our real experimental
> > conditions.
> > 
> > Best Regards,
> > Brendan
> > 
> 
> Peter Kammel  /  pkammel@uiuc.edu
> Department of Physics, Loomis Laboratory
> University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
> 1110 West Green Street, Urbana, IL 61801 
> Tel (217) 333-5424 / Fax (217) 333-1215   
> 
>