MINOS
UCL MINOS Homepage
Back to my MINOS
Previous Work detailing Efficiency and NPE calculations (from June Collaboration meeting)
Subsequently using Mike's Monte Carlo, the quantity of pions that decayed to muons between the cerencovs was factored into the efficiency:
Which produced the additional peak (on the left) in the corrected muon distribution:
1a: dE/dX with 90% truncation
dE/dX with truncation on means at 90%. Note planes 11 and 12.
1b: dE/dX with 90% truncation (divided by intercept)
dE/dX with truncation on means at 90%. Note planes 11 and 12.
1c: dE/dX with 90% truncation (divided by intercept+(plane*gradient))
dE/dX with truncation on means at 90%. Note planes 11 and 12.
1d: dE/dX with 90% truncation (residuals)
dE/dX with truncation on means at 90%. Residuals from straight line fit.
1e: dE/dX with 90% truncation (pull function)
dE/dX with truncation on means at 90%. Pull function from straight line fit.
2: Chi-squared minimisation
*Sep09* See plot in next update
Minimising the chi-squared gives me a best fit to a straight line by stopping at plane 42... In fact, by eye, I used 41 but the slightly strange points at planes 11 and 12 shift it a little...
I've also ignored plane 0 which is way out...
3a: dE/dX with 80% truncation
dE/dX with truncation on means at 80%. Not much change. Is there some way to 'determine' the best truncation value?
3b: dE/dX with 80% truncation (divided by intercept)
dE/dX with truncation on means at 80%.
3c: dE/dX with 80% truncation (divided by intercept+(plane*gradient))
dE/dX with truncation on means at 80%.
4: 90% / 80% truncation
Comparison of 80% to 90% truncation
5: Zoom
Zoom in to region of interest. Is there anything strange about the graphs that go to producing the points at 11 and 12...
6: Plane 5
An example of a normal looking odd plane.
7: Plane 28
An example of a normal looking even plane.
8: Plane 0
Plane 0 - no obvious distortion of shape.
9: Plane 11
Plane 11
10: Plane 12
Plane 12
11a: Splitting the data: 1.8 GeV only
Only 1.8 GeV - the oddness at 11 and 12 is still apparent
11b: Splitting the data: 1.8 GeV only
Only 1.8 GeV - divided by intercept
11c: Splitting the data: 1.8 GeV only
Only 1.8 GeV - divided by expectation
12a: Splitting the data: 2 GeV only
Only 2 GeV - the oddness at 11 and 12 is still apparent
12b: Splitting the data: 2 GeV only
Only 2 GeV - divided by intercept
12c: Splitting the data: 2 GeV only
Only 2 GeV - divided by expectation
13: Comparison of 1.8 to both
both / 1.8
14:Comparison of 2 to both
both / 2
15: Strips hit in planes 11 and 12
Showing what strips get hit in planes 11 and 12
16: Plane 11 Strip 11
90% truncated hit plot for strip 11 in plane 11
17: Plane 11 Strip 12
90% truncated hit plot for strip 12 in plane 11
18: Plane 11 Strip 13
90% truncated hit plot for strip 13 in plane 11
19: Plane 12 Strip 10
90% truncated hit plot for strip 10 in plane 12
20: Plane 12 Strip 11
90% truncated hit plot for strip 11 in plane 12
21: Plane 12 Strip 12
90% truncated hit plot for strip 12 in plane 12