Project

General

Profile

2019-03-18 amp-evolv » History » Revision 13

Revision 12 (Rogers, Chris, 21 March 2019 13:32) → Revision 13/14 (Rogers, Chris, 21 March 2019 14:35)

h1. 2019-03-18 amp-evolv 

 17:00 GMT Monday 18th March 

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

 h2. Actions 

 intro (KL) 
 -0th paragraph add section headings 
 -1st paragraph needs revision; check historical details 
 -3rd paragraph need caveat on e+e- 
 4th paragraph need frictional cooling 

 observables (CR) 
 -introduce cooling formula; but phrased ito amplitude (FD)- -_CR to integrate with paper (CR)_- 
 -remove sentence regarding 9% centile just before eq 1- 
 -Add a sentence regarding "human readable" what is kNN algorithm- -_FD to check CR's understanding (FD)_- 
 -Joining sentence between "observables" and "MICE"- 

 MICE 
 (CR) -contact Jason Tarrant and photo repro regarding image- _for now keep working on it amongst ourselves_ 
 (FD) -upload schematic latex to overleaf- 
 (FD) -Add labels to schematic; make lH2 not LiH absorber; general "look and feel" stuff- 
 (CR) -remove phase space figure to MICE note; consider 2d amplitude plot instead a la Francois thesis figure 6.25- 


 Results 
 *DONE* (CR) francois asked by email - why is mc_reco sample size not same as reco sample size (they are supposed to be same sample _it is impurity at high radius (tracks in MC fiducial but not data fiducial); is impurity properly handled by correction mechanism? Need to check; relies on migration matrix non-unitary_ 
 (CR) -investigate the 17.5 mm bin issue esp at 10-140- _could check rebinning but low priority for now_ 
 (CR) -investigate the scraping aperture _looks like it is MC offset_-; add a vertical line corresponding to the scraping aperture; comment in text 
 (FD) -fractional emittance is better than most significant bin as a table- 
 (FD) -need to do the efficiency correction on fractional emittance- 
 (FD) -need to do the efficiency correction on density- 
 (CR) -Check apertures in lH2 vs None absorber; KL claims window aperture should be mostly not there in "None"- 
 (CR/FD) -Check systematic for density plot in TKU 10 mm; why is SSU CC giving such large uncertainty?- 

 h2. Notes from CM53 


 Try Nature before Nature physics 

 Fig. 1 - schematic 
 (CR) -Preferably plot B_{z}, or introduce an arbitrary factor of -1 after the absorber, or label as |B|- 
 (CR) -Note that the sigma(x) plot comes from linear beam optics calculation- 

 Fig. 2 - phase space 2d plots 
 (CR) Interesting that there is a cliff in the x-py and y-px plots. Is this diffuser aperture (or some other aperture) 
 *DONE* (CR) If show Phase space plots, put one beam ellipse on _won't show ellipse_ 

 Fig. 3 - amplitude pdf 
 *DONE* (CR) Add the amplitude pdf plot without corrections to the supplementary information 
 (CR) -Plot amplitude pdf as a histogram or without horizontal errors- 
 (CR) Afterwards, JHC pointed out that log(n) vs sqrt(A) is linear for Gaussian beam. It might just confuse people to plot it. 
 *DONE* (CR) Vertical axis label is wrong. Normalisation needs to be explained. 

 Fig. 4 - pdf ratio 
 (CR) -Make MC less visible in pdf ratio plot - it tends to dominate- 
 (CR) Increase the MC stats (implies going to production MC, it is time) 

 Fig. 5 - cdf ratio 
 (CR) -The number of significant figures in the table is too great. Need to understand the difference between the errors for different data- 
 (CR) -John and KL asked for raw pdf numbers- 
 (CR) -Discussion of which bin to choose and how to quantify the level at which we observe cooling- 
 * Soler suggested CLS method 
 * -Others suggested looking at significance of first bin rather than most significant bin- 

 (CR) -Move the points to the bin edge, not bin centre; look and feel issues- 
 *DONE* (CR) Check systematic error correlations are handled correctly 

 (CR) -General - check the systematic error is reasonable; e.g. do we need to include big error for SSU and for SSD; check we only use -ve error in SSU- 
 (CR) General - move to production 

 h2. Other jobs 

 (CR) -Check - why is the systematic error so much higher on density plot than e.g. amplitude pdf plot?- 
 (CR) -Add labels to schematic- 
 *DONE* (CR) Fix or explain kink in 10-140 plot amplitdue pdf 
 *DONE but needs second pass* (CR) Write methods section 
 (CR) Update MICE Note 
 (FD) -Add comment noting the beam used for the Poincare plot- 
 (FD) -Add date to the schematic- 
 (ALL) Stats test for table 
 *DONE* (CR) Data to francois for poincare section 
 (FD) Poincare section plots 
 (CR) Fix bibliography; should reference as much as possible up to 50 refs!