Actions

## 2016-11-22-straight-tracks-paper » History » Revision 6

« Previous | Revision 6/9 (diff) | Next »
Rogers, Chris, 23 November 2016 14:03

# 2016-11-22-straight-tracks-paper¶

## Details¶

Tuesday 22nd November at 15:00 and continued on Wednesday 23rd November at 14:00.

http://mice.iit.edu/phonebridge.html

Note:

http://mice.iit.edu/micenotes/public/pdf/MICE0497/MICE0497.pdf

## Notes¶

Present:

John Cobb
Paul Soler
Mariyan Bogomilov
Chris Rogers
Alan Young
Ryan Bayes

### Page 1¶

First three comments may be more appropriate for the paper rather than the MICE note
• Should defend choice of Xenon
• Should define symbols in emittance formula
• Should define equilibrium emittance
1. "Thus, despite the limited angular range it is extremely attractive as a direct measure of the
scattering of muons" Need to add some more quantitative discussion of angular acceptance.

### Page 2¶

1. Table 1: Row for Al numbers are suspect - correct
2. Table 1: General comment that some description of the material budget is required; how much material and where?
3. Table 1: In similar vein, some description of absorber is necessary
4. Scattering angle definitions eqn (3) and (4) are not correct - see supplementary note from JHC Projected-angles.pdf
5. Correction theta = \sqrt(<theta_scatt>) should be theta = \sqrt(<theta^2>)
6. There was some discussion over the use of a Gaussian fit, as mentioned in final sentence of 1.1. Comment that the description would be better in the "analysis" section where the relevant measurements and plots are listed.
7. 0.0038 should be 0.038
8. Comment that section 1.2 needs a lot of work; it was not reviewed in detail.

### Page 3¶

1. "deviation between data and simulation": some discussion over this comment. Which direction is "South"? Why does beam offset introduce bias?
• Beam offset causes clipping, which is a bias
• the 4 cm shift is in MC
• It is a bias in the simulated measurement, not in the data itself

### Page 4 (Fig. 1)¶

1. Be explicit that this is MC through a "bare absorber"
2. Why is the Geant4 MC of Xenon so weird - e.g. asymmetric?
• Ryan is not sure and will (continue to) dig
3. Why is the Cobb-Carlisle MC of Xenon so weird (e.g. thick)?
• JHC will dig

No comment

### Page 6¶

1. Some discussion of the cuts and rate accounting
• Timing selection is a very small time bin, e.g. 200 ps over the few ns width of the muon peak
• Fiducial selection is a 300 mm diameter tracker over a 5 m drift length
• Need to add some description of the basic geometry

Updated by Rogers, Chris over 6 years ago · 6 revisions