STAR Protected
Update 06.05.2018 -- Run 9 embedding: (new) response matrix profile check
I realized yesterday that the profile on the response matrix I had shown to JetCorr was using the wrong axis:
Update 06.05.2018 -- Run 9 embedding: closure tests using new matching algorithm
After modifying the paticle-to-detector-level matching algorithm we had been using (see link below), I performed several closure tests.
Update 06.05.2018 -- Run 9 embedding: new matching algorithm
We recently discovered that I wasn't handling the detector-to-particle matching in the best manner. What tipped us off was the (very small) population of jets at large 'pTdetector' but small 'pT
Update 06.05.2018 -- Charge vs. Full Check in Pythia
To illustrate the difference between charged and full jets, I had been using a very old plot I had generated in Pythia. Here's a new one I made for the Annual User's Meeting which looks much nic
JetCorr Follow-Up [05.29.2018] -- TProfile Check On Response Matrix
During my presentation to JetCorr on May 29th, 2018 the profile of the Response Matrix shown raised some eyebrows (see slide 12 in the link below). It turned out I had drawn it with the errors b
AUM2018 Slides
Attached are the slides for my invited talk at the RHIC/AGS Annual Users Meeting during June 11th - June 15th, 2018. The talk is 20 + 10 min. long.
JetCorr Follow-Up [05.29.2018] -- RFF and FF Closure Tests Using RFF+FF Response
Yesterday, I redid 3 closure tests using my corrected unfolding code:
JetCorr Follow-Up [05.29.2018] -- RFF and FF Closure Tests (And Bug Fix)
During the weekly JetCorr meeting on May 29th, 2018, it was suggested to perform a closure test using a RFF (FF) response to unfold the detector-level FF (RFF) jet spectrum. Slide 13 of the pres
JetCorr Update -- May 29th, 2018
Slides for the weekly JetCorr meeting on May 29th, 2018.
JetCorr Follow-Up [05.22.2018] -- Run 12 vs. Run 9 Embedding
It was pointed out during my presentation to JetCorr on May 22nd, 2018 that while the Run 9 embedding and Run 9 data recoil jet (R = 0.3, charged) 'pT' distributions fall on top of each other, t
JetCorr Follow-Up [05.22.2018] -- Restricting EtTrg To PtParton Bin
While the various trigger, track, and tower distributions from the Run 9 dijet embedding agree well with our Run 9 pi0-triggered data, there's a significant excess in the embedding for towers with a r
Update 05.25.2018 -- Run 9 Embedding: Closure Tests (R = 0.3, Charged)
Below are some closure tests using the response matrices from the Run 9 dijet embedding. I had previously shown that the RFF and FF responses are consistent with each other, so you should be abl
JetCorr Follow-Up [05.22.2018] -- Trigger Et Distributions, Data vs. Pythia
During the JetCorr meeting on May 22nd, 2018, it was suggested that I should I lay the trigger 'eT' distributions from data and Pythia on top of each other. See slide 13 in the presentation belo
JetCorr Follow-Up [05.22.2018] -- Jet DeltaPhi Correlations As a Function of Jet Pt
A question that came up during my presentation in the JetCorr weekly meeting on May 22nd, 2018 was why is there a surplus of embedding jets (relative to data) across the whole range of delta-phi
JetCorr Update -- May 22nd, 2018
Slides for the weekly JetCorr meeting on May 22nd, 2018.
Update 05.21.2018 -- Run 9 embedding: Jet Reconstruction Efficiency With Variable bins (R = 0.3, Charged)
Following up from the previous post: