29-Nov-1999

			Minutes of CAL Meeting 

	Date		27-Nov-1999, 14:00-16:30
	Place		KEK 3-goukan, 4th-floor Meeting Room
	Participants	Kawagoe, Sugimoto, Takeuchi (Kobe Univ)
			Kajino (Konan Univ)
			Takeshita, Furukawa (Shinshu)
			Kim, Oishi, Nakagawa, Ota, Uozumi, Ishizawa (Tsukuba)
			Fujii (KEK)

1)Budget Status
  Fujii reported present situation of material budgets and travel budgets.  
  Transparencies of material budgets are shown here.
  Transparencies of travel budgets are shown here.

a)We over-spent material budgets by 87 man-en. This will be supplemented by 
reserve budget of KEK-JLC group.Transportation costed more than we expected. 
CAEN ADC was also unexpected purchase.
b)At FNAL we have spent $59,000 so far. FNAL comission for October will be 
charged in addition to this. We already transfered $42,900 of J-US money in 
June. We will transfer $16,100 in December. A little may be transfered in 
January for final adjustment.
c)Travel budget of FNAL test now shows deficit of about 18 men-en. We need 
to figure out how to get money for this. Fujii will discuss with university 
staff later.


2)Report on the FNAL beam test results

a)Fujii very briefly overviewed the beam test. 
Also he showed some plots shown at the INSTR99 conference.
 All transparencies shown at INSTR99 are here.
10GeV data at FNAL seems to behave differently from other energy data. 
However once combined with KEK data, it could be on some systematic behaviour.
This must be investigated in detail.

b)Calibration
Takeuchi-san reported calibration part of his work. Transparencies here.
Ishizawa-san showed results of his calibration.	Transparencies here.
Furukawa-san showed calibration part of his work.
Transparencies shown are here.
Presently three calibrartion constants differs to each other by 3%. 
Differences in analysis are such as;
	E(Tower13)/E(total) > Fraction ; This Fraction is different.
	Fit-range of Landau-function fitting.
	Use the muon counter or the last layer of HCAL to tag muons.
Effect of these difference must be cross-checked. Stability against change 
of cut values and fit-ranges should also be checked.

c)Results ( resolution, linearity, e/pi ratio )

c-1)Furukawa-san reported his results.	Transparencies shown are here.
Energy resolution
	for e	27%/sqrt(E) + 0.2% (linear sum) ; fit excludes 10GeV data.
	for pi	45%/sqrt(E) + 1.8% (linear sum) ; fit excludes 10GeV data.
His analysis sums up all 25x4 PMTs even for electron analysis. It was 
suggested that using restricted region should be better in principle. 
He also reported e/pi ratio, but discussion pended because of umbiguity in
translating MT5E currents into actual beam momentum.

c-2)Uozumi-san reported his results.	Transparencies shown are here.
First he reported SWDC analysis which he succeeded to from Ota-san. 
He used CDF data for conversion from MT5E current to momentum. 
He showed results with calculated CENTRAL MOMENTUM.
Linearity was shown to be good when plotted with calculated momentum, 
except for 10GeV data.
Energy resolution 
	for e	29.0%/sqrt(E) + 1.4% (quad sum) ; fit excludes 10GeV data.
	for pi	43.5%/sqrt(E) + 2.0% (quad sum) ; fit excludes 10GeV data.
This is consistent with Furukawa-san's results.
  Next he showed resolutions with event-by-event-calculated momentum. 
This showed practically no difference. Event-by-event scatter-plot of 
HCAL energy and calculated momentum showed little correlation, either. 
Comparison with Done-san's result is needed. 

c-3)Sugimoto-san reported results of PreShower analysis.
Transparencies shown are here.
Energy resolution does not show significant difference between data of 
w/PS and of w/o PS. At least this is good in a sense that PS did not 
introduce any bad systematics.
  He reported signal leakage from central tower to adjacent towers for 
electron events. This is consistent to the light cross talk measured at 
bench test and observed at beam test at KEK.

c-4) Takeuchi-san reported results of SHmax analysis.	
 Transparencies shown are here.
e/pi separation score is as follows with untuned cuts;
	electron efficiency	93%
	pion misidentification	6%
His analysis shows that most of electron events have his of 35 strips or 
more, while there are 40 strips in total. This is aparently too many. 
Definition of 'HIT' strip must be re-examined.

c-5) Nakagawa-san reported results of GEANT simulation.
Transparencies shown are here.
In order to estimate systematic errors, she simulated effects of
	o tile-to-tile photo-electron yield variation,
	o variation of air-gap between lead plates and scintillator assemblies.
At the bench test, tile-to-tile photo-electron yield variation was 15.1% (RMS).
This was introduced into GEANT simulation. The effect is 1% variation for 
total energy measurement for pions, and 4% for energy deposite measurement 
for muons. The effect is larger for muons because number of PMTs to be added 
are smaller. The net effect after obtaining calibration constant with these 
muon data set, and using them for pion energy calculation, must be examined.
  The average air-gap thickness was 4.4mm, and RMS was 2.7mm. 
The effect of air-gap variation is negligible.
  The effect of lead-plate thickness variation must be simulated.
  She also showed effect of tower tilt at calibration. It was negligible.


3) Analysis of KEK beam test

a)Ota-san presented longitudinal shower shape analysis.	
Transparencies shown are here.
Longitudinal hadron shower shape fluctuates a lot. This fluctuation was 
parametrized by expanding it with orthogonal fluctuation vectors. He showed 
very preliminary result of e/pi separation based on 'pion-ness' and 
'electron-ness' using this expansion coefficients. 
  He also plans to make shower generator with realistic fluctuation for 
simulators.

b)Necessity of analysis of data with 4:2-EM + 8:2-HAD was stressed. 
However nobody was assigned to this subject at the meeting.


TIME EXPIRED HERE, and discussion of following item 4) pended.
	4) Plans
	4-1) Simulation
		Update detector configurations and parameters
		Physics performance estimation, especially for 3T-field.
	4-2) R&D in the next fiscal year, and later.


Plans for talks at JPS 2000-spring (3/30-4/2) was quickly discussed. 
Following three talks will be applied.
1) By Uozumi-san			JLC calorimeter...so..so..so..so...I
2) By Furukawa-san or Takeshita-san	JLC calorimeter...so..so..so..so...II
3) By Sugimoto-san or Kawagoe-san	PreSH/SHmax of JLC calorimeter...so..so..so..so...


5)Next Meeting
Small meeting with staff only will be scheduled in December, 
either at KEK or at Tsukuba. Main purpose is to discuss plans for JFY2000.
  Regular meeting with all members will be scheduled in February, after 
submittion of master theses, to discuss analysis results. This may be at 
Kobe or at Shinshu if schedule allows and if there is TV-meeting system 
to connect to Texas.