1 / 15

PPG-53 phi papers status

PPG-53 phi papers status. March 8, 2007 L/H PWG R. Seto. what have we done?. Surveyed all results looked into comparison with STAR looked at internal consistency within PHENIX analysis – internally various analysis are pretty consistent with one exception (run 3 and run 5 pp)

lawrence-emerson
Download Presentation

PPG-53 phi papers status

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PPG-53 phi papers status March 8, 2007 L/H PWG R. Seto

  2. what have we done? • Surveyed all results • looked into comparison with STAR • looked at internal consistency within PHENIX analysis – internally various analysis are pretty consistent with one exception (run 3 and run 5 pp) • Decided to redo KK analysis in pp and KK

  3. The Npart>150 points don’t have enough statistics to give a meaningful peak Sasha broke up the lowest Npart ee data point in AuAu to compare to dAu In both the KK and ee the yield rises rapidly with Npart At the moment the excess exists already in dAu (cf KEK E325) The pp ee/KK data points match This is a key point as this could “prove” we know how to normalize between ee and KK there are problems with this though the main plot sasha

  4. Slopes all ee slopes ~300, all KK slopes ~400. HW: is our excess due to the fit? or do our real data point show an excess? sasha

  5. .038 .020 Comparison to STAR STAR/PHENIX=.038/.020=1.9

  6. Single pion spectra in pp So pions in pp match between STAR and PHENIX Protons – we could not compare because STAR does not do a feedown correction But we had to correct for STAR’s trigger cross section (NSD) Yugi

  7. pp comparison of Kaons K- STAR is ~1/.8=1.25 or 25% higher than PHENIX

  8. 200GeV Au+Au STAR kaon measured from TPC has at least 15% systematic error due to the electron contamination. Phi done with TOF ~57% of STAR (previous slide-1/1.9=53%) Would need sqrt(1/.57)=1.32 or a 32% higher kaon yield in STAR to explain the phi Not able to get a TOF Kaon spectrum to compare shengli

  9. 62GeVAuAu Single kaon(-)@62GeV Phi->kk@62GeV STAR Kaon By TOF ~67% of STAR, no clear pT dependence need sqrt(1/.67)=1.22 or 22% we see 1/.85=1.18 or 18% in the TOF shengli

  10. 200GeV dAu Single kaon(-)@200GeV dAu Phi->kk@200GeV dAu 60% of STAR 80% of STAR the discrepancy of phi could be explain by kaon difference in 200GeV dAu too. The 20-30% higher Kaon Yield of STAR could go a long way to explain the factor of almost 2 (Actually it can explain 70%) Is there another factor?

  11. Problems phenix Run 5 and Run 3 don’t match We seem to be higher than STAR over much of the range (STAR rises at low mt) This is not consistent with the Kaons where we are lower than STAR Is there a way to prove that we have the normalization right? Yes – look at pp (which matches between ee and KK) But do we trust the pp point? pp

  12. questions about dAu • Should the ee and KK deuterons match as well as the pp? • remember at the moment the dAu and the pp KK match and the ee yeild is higher and consistent with very peripheral AuAu • Is it something like E325 at KEK? Widths vs our mass window • Sasha’s Window: 0.997 GeV/c2 - 1.041 GeV/c2 • E325 broadening 0.960-1.040 • we are looking for differences in Branching ratios • 2K mass=0.988 so if phi is broadened to below 0.988 (e.g. from 0.96 to 1.04 then anything below 0.988 will go only to ee • Then ee BR would go up (as we see) • Is this consistent with the broadening that E325 sees? • but does choking off a BR in turn narrow the width? since the BR and width are related? 960-1040 Kyoicho to think and ask some theorists

  13. Status • We have made lots of progress. • we may have a very interesting result • key now is to see the agreement of the pp and dAu data • pp can provide a point where we can show that we know how to normalize between ee and KK • Plan – redo • pp (KK) – Deepali/Maxim • dAu(KK) – Shengli • pp(ee) – Kotaro (presentation to PWG next week?), Deepali • By When? • Meet again in 2 weeks – March 15 (biweekly till we get some results)

  14. Papers? • if we see an excess in ee which holds • Publish PRL with pp, dAu, AuAu KK and ee • follow with PRC • If not or its inconclusive • PRC with comparison of ee and KK • another PRC? KK data?

  15. A challenge (from Barbara) Can a group of people shoot for getting phi to ee data points with small error bars at high Npart using the HBD from this run by Quark Matter?

More Related