high luminosity hall mini-review
DESCRIPTION
High Luminosity Hall Mini-Review. Review A/C spectrometer configurations MAD + HRS, SHMS + HMS, MAD + HMS, SHMS + HRS Four example experiments 1) Pion form factor 2) Hadron form factors to highest possible Q 2 3) Flavor decomposition in SIDIS - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
High Luminosity Hall Mini-Review
• Review A/C spectrometer configurations MAD + HRS, SHMS + HMS, MAD + HMS, SHMS + HRS
• Four example experiments 1) Pion form factor 2) Hadron form factors to highest possible Q2 3) Flavor decomposition in SIDIS 4) Few body form factors
• Mini-Review in Jan. 4-5. Committee: R. Holt (chair), H. Blok, S. Rock
MAD/HRS/HMS/SHMS Summary
MAD HRS SHMS HMSCentral P(GeV) 1~8 0.4~4.3 2.5~11 0.4~7.3P acceptance (%) -20~+40 +-5 -15~+25 +-10P resolution (%) 0.1 0.01 <0.2 0.10~0.15 Angle range (O) 5~90 6~135 5.5~25 10.5~90Y acceptance (cm) 50 10 50 10H acceptance (mr) +-38 +-30 +-18 +-32V acceptance (mr) +-190 +-60 +-50 +-85Solid Angle (msr) 6-24 6 2 or 4 8.1H resolution (mr) 0.3~0.4 0.1 2~4 0.8V resolution (mr) 0.7~1 0.3 1~2 1Y resolution (cm) 0.4~0.7 0.2 0.2~0.6 0.3
Pion Form Factor
• Team Rob Feuerbach, Paul Ulmer (Hall A) Dave Gaskell, Garth Huber (Hall C)
• Pion Form Factor extraction: for fixed Q2, W, measure L in a range of –t,
then extrapolate to pion pole (t=m2)
need L/T separation, and minimize TT, LT contributions
• Kinematics Q2 ~ 1- 6 GeV2, at W ~ 3.3 GeV measure L for –t from –tmin to ~3*(-tmin)
• HRS/HMS for e, MAD/SHMS for small angle crucial• Rate high, systematic uncertainties more important
Kinematics
and Rate
• SHMS setups
Will optimize for
MAD settings
• 50uA,
8cm target
• Rate fast
~0.4 -16.2 h/pt
10000 events
Pion Form Factor Summary
• rate high, statistical uncertain not dominating
• HRS/HMS for e: a factor of 2 in rate (not that important)
• noQuad MAD or normal tune noQuad MAD better p coverage, but limited –t range • Point-to-point angle offsets might be a problem?
• Systematic uncertainty with angle/momentum variations to be done
MAD/HRS and SHMS/HMS no big difference?
Hadron Form Factors at High Q2
• Team:
Ron Gilman, Doug Higinbotham (Hall A)
Dipangkar Dutta, Mark Jones (Hall C)
• Experiments:
GEp, (CT, N-
D with FPP for p + calorimeter for e Compare with HMS/SHMS for p + calorimeter for e
GEp Status
• RG estimate for MAD + calorimeter
• Kinematic/rate: limitation
Q2=15 GeV2,
MAD@ 12.4o, 9 GeV/c for p
Rate ~ 1 Hz
Statistical uncertainty similar to
HMS/SHMS + calorimeter option
(within a factor of 2)
GEp Systematic Uncertainties
• Estimated with 1st order matrix elements/resolutions
• Q2=12 GeV2, 12o: dR ~ 0.01
dp ~ 0.07%, d ~0.6 mr, d ~ 0.5 mr, dy ~ 4.6 mm
• Q2=14 GeV2, dR ~ 0.05
• Reality could be larger
significantly smaller than statistical uncertainties
Flavor decomposition in SIDIS
• Team
Xiaodong Jiang, Jian-ping Chen (Hall A)
Donal Day, Antje Bruell (Hall C)
• SIDIS: (e,e’p+/-) and (e,e’K+/-)
• Unpolarized: on H and D dbar/ubar (systematics)
• Longitudinally polarized: NH3, LiD and 3He (statistics)
u, d, ubar, dbar, s=sbar (LO)
or: uv, dv, dbar-ubar (NLO)
Kinematics and Comparison
• Kinematics: x: 0.07 – 0.65 (~0.4 for sea), Q2: 1.2 – 4.4 GeV2
z ~ 0.5, W > 2 GeV, W’ > 1.5 GeV e: 10-15o, 2-6 GeV/c (MAD/HMS) /K: 6-10o, 3-4 GeV/c (HRS/SHMS) good PID required• Unpolarized: relative systematic: p/d, pi+/pi-• Polarized: measuring A1N
+/-, A1NK+/-, , and/or ratios
• Simulation is on going
MAD+HRS slightly better than HMS+SHMS for polarized?
Few Body Form Factors
• Team Javier Gomez, Makis Petratos (Hall A) Betsy Beise, Ingo Sick (Hall C)
• Earlier projections of form factor A(Q2) with MAD + calorimeter deuteron: Q2 up to 10 GeV2
3He: Q2 up to 5.7 GeV2
• No new information from the team
MAD + calorimeter better than HMS + calorimeter by a factor of 2?
Summary
• Four groups of experiments MAD/HRS/SHMS/HMS
• Pion Form Factor: Rate fast, systematic more important NoQuad MAD+HRS similar to HMS/SHMS?
• GEp (CT, N->) : Statistic more important?
MAD+HRS similar to HMS+SHMS?
• Flavor decomposition in SIDIS: dbar/ubar: systematics dominating, similar? u, u, ubar, dbar, s, statistic dominating, MAD+HRS better?
• A(Q2) for D and 3He: statistic dominating, MAD+calorimeter better?