Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 17:18:25 +0900 From: Takashi Kobayashi <takashi.kobayashi@kek.jp> Subject: Re: nue meeting Message-Id: <20010410170042.C0E6.TAKASHI.KOBAYASHI@kek.jp> Dear all, Shall we have ############################### nue meeting April 18 (Wed) 10:00- ############################### (I heard that SK meeting will be held regulary once/2week just before KT meeting. And I talked with kaneyuki-san and he said it's OK for him to have nue meeting at the same time with SK meeting, say, for example 14:30-16:00 nue-SK meeting, 16:00- KT regular meeting. So I want to have nue meeting regularly once/2weeks at the same time with SK meeting. However, on the day of next SK meeting(Apr18,afternoon), I have another meeting afternoon. So the time 10:00 is irregular) Possible agenda 1. Status of processing of new data (Yoshida) 2. Quality of data (calibration, timing, ....) (Maesaka?, Yoshida?) 3. List up items TO DO for finalizing present analysis (Yoshida) Possible improvement? 4. How to proceed after the present analysis? On Sat, 31 Mar 2001 00:50:22 +0900 Takashi Kobayashi <takashi.kobayashi@kek.jp> wrote: > Dear all nue interested people, > > This year, I think we must present some results from nue analysis > to outside. First step for that is the next collaboration meeting. > I think we must have some results ready to be official at the time. > > In order for interested persons to get together and make thing move > forward, I propose to have regular nue meeting once/week or once/2weeks. > > How do you think? Please give me comments. > > If you interested, please give me your favarite time > for the meeting by indicating o/x in the following table. > > MON TUE WED THU FRI (SAT) > 10:00 x x x > 13:00 > 15:00 > 17:00 > (19:00) > > > The following is my thought for this year's strategy. > > [I] By summer (confs), we continue the present Yoshida-kun's way, i.e. > (1)use LG+VETO for nue contamination at FD > (2)use standard e-like selection at SK (or with minimum improvement) > (3)to extrapolate nue/numu ratio, use MC validated by > PIMON(near/far ratio for numu flux) and by FGD(nue/numu ratio) > and > (a)finalize background event/systematic error estimation for > nue/numu measurement at FGD > (b)finalize beam-nue BG estimation at SK with consistent > treatment of systematic error from extrapolation with numu > analyses. > > Yoshida-kun is now itemizing remaining work more detail. > > [II] In parallel (or gradually increasinglly), start improving SK electron > selection. (This might be ~1 year project) > > Probably there might be two directions to go after > the step [I] above, > > 1 improve FGD nue selection > 2 improve SK nue selection > > But, now, yoshida-kun's analysis says that # of BG event for > SK nue selection(1-ring e-like) is ~1.9 events. > Within the 1.9 events, the contribution from beam nue is ~0.2. > And the remaining background from numu int. is not dominated even by > pi0 (major contribution is CC inela.). > In this situation, I thought the more effective direction > for nue appearance search is the second one. > > In order to improve electron selection in SK, we need to start > from studing SK PID. Then study e/pi0 selection recently done by > Obayashi-san et.al. Then I would like to construct a kind of > new parameter(likelihood) by convining those. > > Then if we made any new parameters, I think we need study on KT > data/atm nu data to verify the parameters. > > > How do you all think about it? > Please give your comments. > Thank you. > ---------------- Takashi Kobayashi Institute for Particle and Nuclear Studies, KEK 1-1 Oho, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-0801 Japan TEL: +81-298-64-5425, FAX: +81-298-64-7831 URL: http://neutrino.kek.jp/~kobayasi
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 10 2001 - 17:27:32 JST