Difference between revisions of "NnL analysis meeting-20210331"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
=Information= | =Information= | ||
* 21:00- March 31, 2021 (JST) | * 21:00- March 31, 2021 (JST) | ||
− | * Participants: | + | * Participants: Nue, Liguang, Pete, Joerg, Franco, Guido, Toshi, Sho, Bishnu, K.N.Suzuki, K. Itabashi, Nathaniel |
* via BlueJeans | * via BlueJeans | ||
Revision as of 07:39, 26 March 2021
nnΛ Analysis Meeting
Information
- 21:00- March 31, 2021 (JST)
- Participants: Nue, Liguang, Pete, Joerg, Franco, Guido, Toshi, Sho, Bishnu, K.N.Suzuki, K. Itabashi, Nathaniel
- via BlueJeans
Reports
(25 + 10 min) Hampton analysis by B. Pandey
(15 + 10 min) Tohoku analysis (1) by K. Itabashi
(10 min) Tohoku analysis (2) by S. Nagao
(25 + 10 min) Kyoto analysis by K.N. Suzuki
- Resolution study by Geant4 simulation
- Angle resolution
- Missing mass resolution
- Systematic error on BΛ
- Cross section analysis
Discussion
- What needs to be done / checked for the publication?
References for discussion
- from Hampton
- from Tohoku
- from Kyoto
- Mar 03, 2021: Simple test of matrix tuning by using simulated data: JLabMeeting_20210324_gogami.pdf
- June 18, 2020: Missing mass spectra: [1]
- May 01, 2020: Angle resolution (Summary of Suzuki’s study) [2]
- Apr 21, 2020: Missing mass resolution (Fake peak study by Itabashi is found in the last part): [3]
- Apr 24, 2020: Comments on the missing mass resolution: [4]
- Apr 16, 2020: How to treat angle resolution for the intrinsic resolution estimation (here, the worse resolution for angle is used compared to the recent values though): [5]
- Mar 13, 2020: The expected resolution, the number of events, items to be reexamined (p. 31, 32): [6]