Photon energy distribution using DPM [message #13269] |
Wed, 28 March 2012 18:50 |
Ganesh Tambave
Messages: 5 Registered: June 2009 Location: groningen
|
occasional visitor |
From: *KVI.nl
|
|
Dear All,
I have tried to reproduce fig.3.2 (please find attached: EMCTDR_fig.3.2.png) shown in EMC TDR page no.33 using DPM event generator to estimate pile-up probabilites.
I have reproduced it for 15 GeV anti-proton (please find attached: dpm_photon_2D.png and it's y-projection for theta 5 to 21 deg.: dpm_photon_2D_y-proj.png).
If I compare both the figures then they don't look same, the photon energy distribution mean in my figure is about 1.5 GeV and in TDR fig. is about 200 MeV.
Can anyone help me to understand this difference?
I'm using only MC true information from DPM (no detector at all).
Regards,
Ganesh Tambave
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Photon energy distribution using DPM [message #13285 is a reply to message #13269] |
Mon, 02 April 2012 16:51 |
Bertram Kopf
Messages: 110 Registered: March 2006
|
continuous participant |
From: *ep1.ruhr-uni-bochum.de
|
|
Dear Ganesh and all others,
meanwhile, we could reproduce the plots shown in EMC TDR on page 33. We considered the pure MC-truth information of the DPM generator without any secondaries (i.e. w/o the material budget in front of the EMC). In order to get reasonable results we required that all short and long living resonances (pi0, eta, Delta, Sigma, etc.) are decaying within the generator. The new plots for 15GeV/c beam momentum are in good agreement with the figures of the EMC TDR and can be seen here:
a) Egam vs. theta
gam_e_theta.png
b) Egam for 5deg > theta > 21deg
gam_e_in_fwd.png
In addition you can find here the particle list for the first events where at least 1 photon is in the region between 5deg > theta > 21deg:
FirstEvents5To21deg.txt
Of course, our results are in disagreement with the results obtained by Ganesh. At the moment I don't know why. But is it possible that in Ganesh studies all long living particles like Lambda, Sigma, etc. are required to be stable?
Best regards,
Bertram.
|
|
|
|
|
|