Difference between revisions of "NnL analysis meeting-20210331"

From Tritium Experiments Group
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 45: Line 45:
  
 
=Discussion=
 
=Discussion=
* What needs to be done / checked for the publication?  
+
* What needs to be done / checked ?  
 
** H contamination → Shape of Λ may be better to be asymmetry to discuss about the Σ bound region.  (→ Hampton)
 
** H contamination → Shape of Λ may be better to be asymmetry to discuss about the Σ bound region.  (→ Hampton)
 
** Single peak inclusion in Al data for the tuning → any other peaks grow? (→ Japan)
 
** Single peak inclusion in Al data for the tuning → any other peaks grow? (→ Japan)
Line 52: Line 52:
 
* Questions to Hampton group
 
* Questions to Hampton group
 
** How to estimate  
 
** How to estimate  
*** the angular resolutions (Δ x' and &Delta y')?  
+
*** the angular resolutions (Δ x' and &Delta y')? → Hole size
 
*** QF Λ shape including the Σ ?
 
*** QF Λ shape including the Σ ?
*** the differential cross sections and their errors (acceptance correction etc.)?
+
*** the differential cross sections and their errors (acceptance correction etc.)? → ratio to QF Λ (assumed to be 400 nb/sr).
  
 
=References for discussion=
 
=References for discussion=

Revision as of 12:17, 31 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

Hampton

(10 min) Summary by L. Tang

  • Matrix tuning
    • Angle resolution is limited due to the hole size.
      → Δθ = 3.4 mrad
  • The intrinsic mass resolution
    • Large A dependence because of the large angle contribution.

(20 + 10 min) Details by B. Pandey

  • Al peaks are involved in the tuning.

Kyoto

(5 min) Japanese Analysis Summary by T. Gogami

Presentation file = JLabMeeting_20210331_gogami.pdf
Supplement (angle definition) = JLabMeeting_20210331_gogami_2.pdf

  1. Expected mass resolution
  2. Momentum tuning with Λ(H), Σ(H), and Λ(T)
  3. Cross section

(25 + 10 min) Kyoto analysis by K.N. Suzuki

  • Resolution study by Geant4 simulation
    • Angle resolution: Δ θ = 1.2 mrad in σ
    • Missing mass resolution; no strong mass dependence was estimated.
  • Systematic error on BΛ
  • Cross section analysis

Tohoku

(10 + 5 min)Tohoku analysis (1) by S. Nagao

Presentation file = nagao20210331_JLab_analysis_meeting.pdf

  • The intrinsic mass resolution
  • Tuning with Al data

(20 + 10 min) Tohoku analysis (2) by K. Itabashi

Discussion

  • What needs to be done / checked ?
    • H contamination → Shape of Λ may be better to be asymmetry to discuss about the Σ bound region. (→ Hampton)
    • Single peak inclusion in Al data for the tuning → any other peaks grow? (→ Japan)
    • Information about the matrix tuning and matrices (which have not been involved Al tuning at all) will be provided to Japanese group (→ Hampton)
  • Questions to Hampton group
    • How to estimate
      • the angular resolutions (Δ x' and &Delta y')? → Hole size
      • QF Λ shape including the Σ ?
      • the differential cross sections and their errors (acceptance correction etc.)? → ratio to QF Λ (assumed to be 400 nb/sr).

References for discussion