Particle Physics Analysis Note: Plans and Discussions for Kaon Analysis

1. Analysis note plans ppg0016 meeing, Feb 11, 2003 Richard Seto

2. Some things to solve • Really a factor of 2 in dndy??? • Adding emcal analysis for dndy • Kaon Analysis • Munir (Debsankar??) Kaon spectra • Charlie – MC corrections • Embedding/Run-by run from Dipali and debsankar • Someone – detailed comparison with HPWG (RKS??) • WHY? • Double check dndy for phi-TOF (factor of 2?) • Cross check TOF/EMCAL PID so we can use it for paper • Can Debsakar/dipali repeat the Kaon analysis?

3. Duplicate analysis • Great strength of our analysis is duplication!! Debsankar Munir Dipali Charlie Debsankar Dipali ANY OTHER THINGS? Munir, Charlie – Kaon spectra

4. Outline of analsis note • I would like answers from BOTH Debsankar and Munir unless you have explicitely checkedwith each other and agree. Part of this is to check. • I would like for each analysis (Debsankar, Munir, Charlie, RKS, Dipali) ALL the steps, files and programs  • Data Selection Criteria:(DM) • Number of raw events (min bias) (DM) • Good runs

5. Lists: • centralitity bins- 0-10, 10-20,20-40, 40-60, 60-93 (any other? DM) • mt (or pt) bins (DM)  • Cuts: (DM please check) • For tracks in EMCal • 0.3<p<1.0 • emcsdphi2+ emcsdz2 < 9.0 • isPi and isK calculated using EMCal resolution of 480ps • |isP|<3.0 (?) • Single Track: • |bbcz| < 35 cm • |zed| < 75 • Dch quality : 31 or 63 • For tracks in TOF • etof > 0.002 • tofsdphi2+tofsdz2<9.0 • |isK|<3.0 • 0.2<p<2.0

6. Conditions on pairs • ghost track rejection : • applied ONLY to same sign pairs • |delta_zed|<0.02 && |delta_phi|<0.03 • one member of the pair is randomly rejected • intruder rejection : • In same arm and same sector • TOF : |delta_ttof|<0.001 && |delta_etof|=0.000001 • PbSc: |delta_temc|<0.001 && |delta_ecorr|<0.000001 • both members of pair are rejected for TOF-TOF and East-East combination. • No intruder rejection for TOF-East combination • For mixed pair +-, ++ and -- : • 15 bbcz bins from -30 cm in an increment of 4 cm tracks from same vertex bins are mixed. • 3s pc3 matching cut on East-East and TOF-East Combination • Normalization using likesign Pairs

7. ALL plots • PID plot from TOF (from NIM) • *PID plot from EMCAL (DM) • mass plots all bins - with number of events (DM) unsubtracted and subtracted

8. pp • Runs etc as in AUAU case • Pp mass plots • pp mt distribution

9. MC (Dipali) Detailed explanation of MC and how it was run (i.e. dead channel mapsassumptions made etc) • Single phi - Input distribution described (and shown) • Acceptance plots vs mt • Corrections from MC: • Embedding • Tracking • PID • TOF • EMC • Difference in sigmas (Dipali)

10. Other Corrections: • Run by Run (Debsankar)any other? • Systematic Errors (ALL) • Table of ALL numbers - raw counts to final yields in mt and centrality bins

11. Physics plots • *Mt plots for all centralities • *Mt vs centrality • *Centrality dependence of the yield (dn/dy vs centrality) • *same as above normalized to npart • *same as above normalized to Kaons, pions?, protons?  • *To check out quenching - two bins central and peripheral - pt distribution AuAu/pp • Possible stuff • T dependence as a fuction of mass

12. Notes • For the yield analysis add the use of fixed width so that a narrower width doesn't change it- I.e. just use the the amplitude • Show width vs centrality with dndy vs centrality • Quantify the signal above the background especially how much is in the wings • See if wings narrow peak 

15. Questions (an example) • Use dndy=N/Nevt * CF/BR/effrun (corrected from meeting) • QM: N=294, Nevt=3M, CF=15500, effrun=.72 • =4.3 • Problems: PC3 cut on TOF, bad DC map • Now: N=500, Nevt=2.7M, CF=8500, effrun=1.15 • =2.7 • I.e. no PC3 cut, so N goes up • Good DC map so CF factor goes down • Does this include the effect of no PC3?? Does CF go down from both effects? • Effrun goes up because of good DC map or pc3 or both?? • Note that if you use old effrun this becomes 4.3