Difference between revisions of "Elong-13-09-24"
From HallCWiki
(→Comparing dAzz between x0.75) |
(→Comparing dAzz between x0.75) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
! colspan="3" | <math>A_{zz}</math> !! !! colspan="3" | <math>b_1</math> | ! colspan="3" | <math>A_{zz}</math> !! !! colspan="3" | <math>b_1</math> | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | | colspan="3" | [[Image:2013-09-25-Azz.png| | + | | colspan="3" | [[Image:2013-09-25-Azz.png|500px]] || || colspan="3" | [[Image:2013-09-25-b1-final.png|500px]] |
|- | |- | ||
| style="width: 50px;" | <math><x></math> || style="width: 150px;" |<math>dA_{zz}^{stat} (\times 10^{-3})</math> || style="width: 150px;" | <math>dA_{zz}^{sys} (\times 10^{-3})</math> || style="width: 5px;" | || style="width: 50px;" |<math><x></math> || style="width: 150px;" | <math>dA_{zz}^{stat} (\times 10^{-3})</math> || style="width: 150px;" | <math>dA_{zz}^{sys} (\times 10^{-3})</math> | | style="width: 50px;" | <math><x></math> || style="width: 150px;" |<math>dA_{zz}^{stat} (\times 10^{-3})</math> || style="width: 150px;" | <math>dA_{zz}^{sys} (\times 10^{-3})</math> || style="width: 5px;" | || style="width: 50px;" |<math><x></math> || style="width: 150px;" | <math>dA_{zz}^{stat} (\times 10^{-3})</math> || style="width: 150px;" | <math>dA_{zz}^{sys} (\times 10^{-3})</math> | ||
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
| − | --[[User:Ellie|E. Long]] | + | --[[User:Ellie|E. Long]] 17:22, 25 September 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:22, 25 September 2013
Comparing dAzz between x<0.75 and x>0.75
Looking at the newest Azz rates plot, that we can get those statistics from a week-long measurement almost seems too good to be true. As a check, I've compared it a bit more closely to what we did for the b1 proposal.
| <math>A_{zz}</math> | <math>b_1</math> | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
| |||||
| <math><x></math> | <math>dA_{zz}^{stat} (\times 10^{-3})</math> | <math>dA_{zz}^{sys} (\times 10^{-3})</math> | <math><x></math> | <math>dA_{zz}^{stat} (\times 10^{-3})</math> | <math>dA_{zz}^{sys} (\times 10^{-3})</math> | |
| 0.8 | 4.85 | 5.26 | 0.16 | 1.42 | 1.90 | |
| 0.9 | 3.56 | 12.0 | 0.28 | 2.07 | 1.98 | |
| 1.0 | 3.28 | 0.249 | 0.36 | 2.28 | 1.95 | |
| 1.1 | 3.55 | 30.7 | 0.49 | 2.14 | 1.96 | |
| 1.2 | 5.15 | 66.7 | ||||
| 1.3 | 6.29 | 92.4 | ||||
| 1.4 | 9.15 | 99.8 | ||||
| 1.5 | 11.7 | 100. | ||||
| 1.6 | 9.26 | 100. | ||||
| 1.7 | 7.98 | 100. | ||||
| 1.8 | 9.79 | 100. | ||||
It's easiest to compare it to the lowest x point for b1, since that's where the rates are the closest. The b1 measurement has twice the x range, and also about half of the statistics, so I think that the uncertainties for Azz make sense.
--E. Long 17:22, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
