DC2 IRF Status - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 10
About This Presentation
Title:

DC2 IRF Status

Description:

Revise scaling function so that 68% containment is ~1 for class A. ... The largest class A deviation is at right. class A front fits are all within 0.1 ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:49
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 11
Provided by: burn56
Category:
Tags: irf | dc2 | status

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: DC2 IRF Status


1
DC2 IRF Status
  • Meeting agenda, references at http//confluence.s
    lac.stanford.edu/display/DC2/060203
  • Deadlines
  • Feb 10 finish parameterization definitions
    (functional forms, bins)
  • Feb 13 finish implementation
  • Feb 17 Verification
  • Feb 20 Final report
  • Event Classes - finalized to be A and B as
    proposed by Julie
  • DC2Cuts.C now in DataChallenge package, under cvs
    control.
  • Effective area - Jean
  • Dispersion Riccardo
  • PSF Toby (new stuff)

2
The calibration data updated with new low energy
  • Photon response from allgamma
  • Version v7r3p4, with reprocess to update CTB
    variables
  • (4000-2)50 K generated events into 6 m2
  • uniformly in log(E) from 18 MeV to 180 GeV (4
    decades)
  • uniform in cos(?) from -1 to 0 (upper LAT
    hemisphere)
  • (2000-1)5 K generated 1.25 ltlog(E) lt 3.75. (1.5
    decades)
  • Factor of 40/3 more for Elt562 MeV
  • Background
  • Version v7r3p5, also CTB updated, and filtered
    with CTBGAMgt0
  • 18675 seconds of live time, distributed uniformly
    over 3 days of the DC2 orbit

new
3
PSF - Jean
class A
class B
front
back
4
Dispersion - Riccardo
5
Dispersion better function
6
Dispersion, cont
  • Parameterization of energy and angle in progress
    needs more data at low energy, has not use the
    new run
  • Class B big problem!

7
Class B what to do with it
  • Substantial low energy tail in dispersion
  • These events will not be fit properly!
  • Is it worth it?
  • ? I think not!
  • But if we include them, we have to treat the
    analysis properly the effective area for
    analyses that depend on the energy must be
    reduced

?
good energy
8
PSF (Toby)
  • Revise scaling function so that 68 containment
    is 1 for class A.

9
PSF, cont
class A back
  • Since the fit is restricted to 10 68 radii,
    there is a potential normalization issue, if the
    predicted tail is different from the measured
    one.
  • The largest class A deviation is at right
  • class A front fits are all within 0.1

overestimate 0.5
underestimate 1.6
10
Addendum new class B
Riccardo suggested to modify the class B
definition by requiring CTBGoodEnergyProbgt0.3 for
all events. Here are the resulting
acceptances. The blue points are those for which
the measured energy is gt60 of the actual.
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com