09:57:42 Closed captioning is on.
09:57:51 It says live transcript is available.
09:57:56 Yeah.
09:57:56 Yeah, you can see how it translates.
09:58:01 Are you you're watching it in real time, those down, and
09:58:06 it's, you know, obviously, it makes mistakes or if I forget how it translated j lab.
09:58:16 I'm not doing it right this time.
09:58:18 When you're inside of it came out these, you know, something completely ridiculous.
09:58:26 Anyway, every trying recording or whatever. Yeah I'm recording the, the session and closed captioning, which I'm told by his MIT requirement.
09:58:41 Okay, I'm probably careful about what I'm saying.
09:58:49 Anyway.
10:00:06 Hello.
10:00:09 Hello, Visa
10:00:13 visa.
10:01:52 Let's see who are we missing.
10:01:57 We're still in a magic's meeting.
10:02:01 Okay.
10:02:14 Wow. Okay. Two minutes, give me one more minute and then we're still missing.
10:02:22 Bobby
10:02:28 Bobby, okay.
10:02:30 Okay, so it's all the graduate soon so the postdocs, I guess we can start.
10:02:37 Okay, yeah. Amen. Anything for this week. I don't have any major updates. I've been working on the drift chamber optimization and trying to analysis some
10:02:52 systematic error on my background extraction code, it's going to cause.
10:02:59 Okay.
10:03:02 Sounds good.
10:03:05 Okay.
10:03:07 on T Beck's.
10:03:11 The news is, I've told this in a couple of meetings already so it's some of you already know this. We've not we are not going to be invited to the May PRC Daisy better feeling wise is that since there has not been any progress on the extracted beam line
10:03:34 at Daisy, that there's little point in TX, making a presentation at this time.
10:03:45 What remains to be seen from
10:03:50 will have a meeting on Thursday and one of the things I wanted to ask people there was, we had arranged for letters of support from various theoreticians Peter Blunden Andre off and as of.
10:04:14 And Mark Vander Hagen to write to the daisy PRC and the chair of the PRC are, and the research director in support of cheap acts and I'm wondering if that makes sense to just continue doing that.
10:04:28 At this time, or wait till the fall meeting of the PRC, I don't know anybody at any preference.
10:04:39 I don't think it matters too much.
10:04:42 As long as the theoreticians don't change their mind between now and the fall we can get it to them later.
10:04:51 I mean I think getting them getting the theorists activated sooner rather than later is not a bad thing.
10:05:01 If they want to do some work just like, I mean, it might impact, the design of the experiment, you know, if we learned something really, I don't know.
10:05:11 Yeah, Peter was going to do some new calculations and send them to axle for axles fit and his prediction for a large, the two photon effect would be.
10:05:29 So I think that's useful, and we were going to upgrade the proposal, or update the proposal with,
10:05:39 you know, the ideas that Andre off and as of Mark Vander Hagen suggested the ones from
10:05:52 Alexander, Thomas black don't seem to be feasible. He wants to go down to very low epsilon and we we just don't reach that. So, anyway, I mean I'm on the, on the PRC I wouldn't read too much into it I mean, I don't know the certain quarter this month
10:06:11 has a large ad for a new ad for particle physics a daisy and there's also a long interview with doc of niche at CERN blinding his vision for CERN's I don't think I just think that
10:06:29 daisies in transition, there'll be a new had particle physics so they probably said well let's just wait i don't i don't know that I mean that's what I see.
10:06:42 Yeah, I'll have to look up a certain period.
10:06:45 Yeah.
10:06:47 Normally it's delivered to my office but I haven't been into my office.
10:07:01 What.
10:06:55 Okay.
10:06:55 Okay, that was it for
10:07:00 cheap back so Olympus.
10:07:02 I haven't heard anything more I know Axl was working on the answers to the referees and it should have been submitted. You submitted a symmetric. I submitted yeah he sent me that and I resigned.
10:07:16 Okay, good, good.
10:07:19 Okay. Anything else young, did you want to humans already spoken about mine so sorry. Sorry, the mines meeting is still ongoing actually but yeah off a little later.
10:07:32 Okay.
10:07:34 Okay. Um,
10:07:38 Let's see what's next.
10:07:43 So we submitted the proposal to, to the collaboration for comment.
10:07:51 I've had a few comments already.
10:07:55 Namely, Jeff, Martin and router mechanic.
10:08:03 wanted to sign up.
10:08:06 Jeff was already on it. But he sort of switched his
10:08:13 responsibility to be integration. And so I suggest that, and that's what router wanted to do as well. So, so that's the amount of people from Manitoba will work on beam integration, and they'll leave the central aiders to try them, and St Mary's at this
10:08:37 point.
10:08:41 The other thing is I had a message back from Stan, yen.
10:08:48 With a lot of comments that I'm going.
10:08:51 You know, some of them are trivial typos and things like that I can change that. But he's requesting some new information, and some histograms, and things like that so I'm going to bump that up to yawn and and Richard and they can decide whether or not
10:09:10 they want to answer that I'll send you a standards comments after this meeting. And can you give me some preview, so that I mentally prepared.
10:09:24 Yeah, I can
10:09:29 actually I can, I can show you if I start up my other screen.
10:10:07 Okay.
10:10:16 And if I now
10:10:21 get my own to run.
10:10:25 And
10:10:30 he really took an interest in this experiment. Yeah.
10:10:38 So, what was the first one that didn't point to anything and let's see once he intends it to mean, add his name to the list.
10:10:50 Okay, so I can call that one
10:11:15 Okay. And that one I can take care of.
10:11:21 Okay. So a question are the spectrometers Point to Point focusing in the non Ben plane or or point to parallel to get better resolution of initial non been playing angle.
10:11:33 Well, it's a title so I pulled this point to parallel. Now, but it's not quite that because it has this mixtape, but in principle, it's been two barrel.
10:11:46 Okay, so I can answer that.
10:11:50 And of course these are the parameters for the 45 MTV right.
10:12:07 Yeah, sure. We should maybe update that was the thing I have to take them further down we should probably.
10:12:01 Yeah, so he liked to see the Fineman diagrams for the irreducible QED background.
10:12:09 Yeah, okay.
10:12:12 I mean we had that in the old one night we can probably just copy that over. Okay, but you can do it.
10:12:19 Find the time. Yeah, yeah. I also have to include the references obviously I forgot that. Yeah.
10:12:26 This I think it's fairly straightforward.
10:12:29 This one I thought was more.
10:12:36 So you want to comment on how experimental reaches calculated.
10:12:44 Well, we assume that the everyone has nowhere.
10:12:53 Yeah.
10:12:55 Yeah, and that's experiment limit you don't see anything you see a background, and there's a secular statistical fluctuation on top of it, that you can see.
10:13:19 Yeah, but it's.
10:13:12 so is there a point to management, measuring the accidental right.
10:13:37 Yeah, that actually I had that point in the old thing, I thought I had written a sentence about that here too, but maybe I forgot.
10:13:26 It's the mixed mixed coincidences. That's good. Yeah, I think that's it.
10:13:40 Okay, so I'll send this to you, young. Yes, please. I'll do the trivial ones and, and then I'll send it to you.
10:13:50 Oh, it's good that he really, I mean, alternative if you want to have a little bit more work.
10:13:55 You could do it it's to do's and the Overleaf and yeah sure about has been done that has not been done.
10:14:00 Yeah, sure. Right.
10:14:03 I love ice I think we will.
10:14:06 I mean, maybe generally this all comments, if, if you don't do them right away.
10:14:11 Make it to do. I have the to the notes on in Overleaf so I can just say to draw in line and then the text. Yeah, yeah.
10:14:21 Okay, I can do that.
10:14:31 Richard did you want to see anything.
10:14:33 No, no, I'm good. I just got an appointment to get my vaccine
10:14:41 had a snip off for a second so I'm happy.
10:14:44 Yeah, no, I think, You know I looked at the proposal.
10:14:50 Think it's significantly more and more mature than while we sent to jail I think that's, that's what you can say for sure.
10:15:00 Yeah, and I, we had a statement in there that all members of our group were ready to work on it, I remove that. Because, I mean, just to be clear for the students.
10:15:09 It's nothing that you will, unless you really want to work on it but at this point.
10:15:17 Yeah, if you want to delay your thesis and postdoc would be nice post graduate
10:15:26 totally different from class well as we should.
10:15:31 Or mines. Actually it's kind of overlapping with mines.
10:15:40 Okay.
10:15:47 So,
10:15:52 Anything on EIC.
10:15:57 Yeah, I mean there's been a lot of meetings.
10:16:03 But I think our focus will be on ha, I think that's going to start. I hope so.
10:16:16 Okay.
10:16:19 We're not will send anything. People want to comment on before we go to class 12.
10:16:26 I just wanted to say so that the end, I think will present what we did for a sec, in a framework of my fellowship jail up.
10:16:40 This week on this SRC meeting.
10:16:44 President, the outward there that. Yeah, I know that's ongoing and I might see I just have no bandwidth.
10:17:00 But that is what I also don't have time to participate at all so she's doing stuff. I, and I applied yesterday for a professorship position in Zagreb.
10:17:06 Okay, so yeah.
10:17:09 Right now it's long evaluation period and procedures.
10:17:14 So yeah, well if there's anything I can do to help you just let me know. Okay, not. Thank you. Everything's fine.
10:17:27 So, Bobby I just read your chat.
10:17:31 Can you hear us now yeah yeah I'm on my phone now and I've been able to hear you for the past 15 minutes or so so it's it's great now. Thank you. Okay.
10:17:42 I've. I'm recording the meeting so if you want to go back and listen to what was said at the beginning, it'll be posted on the code page and, you know, after the meeting.
10:17:57 Okay, great. So, so does that mean I can skip the first 20 minutes every day now.
10:18:04 Just kidding. Oh, no, that's not right, it
10:18:09 just means that in the 20 minutes, all the work goes to you.
10:18:14 Right.
10:18:17 And yes, Steve I'll send you the draft proposal.
10:18:23 Okay.
10:18:24 Anything else before moving on to class 12
10:18:32 human Do we want, do you want to meet now in a different room, or Skype or something.
10:18:38 Yeah, just a different.
10:18:40 Okay.
10:18:42 Do you have one.
10:18:49 I can try and create breakout rooms.
10:18:52 You should be able to,
10:18:55 but just don't last.
10:19:02 Okay, so I created one. And
10:19:08 whereas you men.
10:19:11 Men. I don't know what this means.
10:19:18 Okay, so there's a breakout room somewhere. Yeah, I'ma go that thank you all see Talk to you soon. Okay. Amen. You can see it to actually you don't see a dog we could all join you.
10:19:31 Okay, good.
10:19:33 Okay. Um.
10:19:37 then on to class 12.
10:19:41 Yeah, so let's start with the three year renewal.
10:19:45 Thank thanks to everybody. Dog and I think we have a pretty coherent draft.
10:19:54 I definitely need to work some more on the dark light section I just wanted to wait a couple of days, make sure things settled but.
10:20:04 So one issue is equipment, so we have 60 k per annum for four years on, on equipment.
10:20:14 Right now, I, I've written somewhere that we were going to buy 30 care of equipment of computer equipment each year for the first two years.
10:20:25 So I mean that would.
10:20:28 I mean, the actual amount is, is probably not of great significance because in any given year, we can spend some more.
10:20:38 If we wanted to spend 50 k the first year you know I'm sure we can do that. But what's really important is to get it in there as an item and just explain what it roughly where it's going.
10:20:49 So I think 60 k would basically double the number of cores, which I think Bobby, I think that's what I read you had written that song right. That's That's correct.
10:21:00 Yeah, so, I think, just leave it at that.
10:21:05 Dog you shared spec. I think some detector related equipment. I don't know what
10:21:14 you. You should have seen an email from me giving a budget for cheap x over the next three years.
10:21:27 But, you know, I think I said this dog, a minute.
10:21:36 Okay.
10:21:39 Okay expenses I got it yeah expenses for two packs. Ok.
10:21:46 Okay. It's quite a, I can't remember I think it came to 130 I know that's great. Yeah, so you have travel in there and shipping and things so equipment was rather modest so okay so I'll I won't, I won't make it less than that number may get a little more.
10:22:02 And then I'm going to add some equipment on polarized helium three.
10:22:06 Just something. And so it comes to like 60 K.
10:22:18 Yeah. So we, so we have it in there and I think we, in the text in the tea packs section you should mention, you know, connect to it, and I think right now in the Monte Carlo section on class 12 we connect to the computing.
10:22:28 Future computing needs and I'll do the same with the polarized helium three.
10:22:32 So that's good.
10:22:37 Great.
10:22:38 So yeah so i think you know rationalize the references but probably, we should send it around for comment to the group within a couple of days, just so everybody can go go over it.
10:22:54 I think maybe if we give it a Karen by the end of the week we're probably in good shape our way dog I think, yeah, yeah, we can.
10:23:01 That's earlier than she wanted it so. Okay. Okay, good.
10:23:05 So let's play with it, like, get these equipment numbers in Polish a little bit like to update the dark light section with the latest search a reach plots and make sure it's kind of all kind of legal latest target thickness and energy and all of that,
10:23:22 just make sure it's right. Oh, the other thing was, shouldn't, shouldn't we list.
10:23:29 like 70 for tea bags and dark light. The collaborating institutions, I think we used to do that like at the very top, in collaboration with.
10:23:37 I think that might be helpful in the past there was an appendix that had to we're collaborating with.
10:23:47 But yeah, I don't know I haven't looked at the detail.
10:23:51 Okay, format for the proposals, maybe they've changed that.
10:24:00 But
10:24:00 this thing, you know, if you see it's in collaboration with a lot of institutions you know it has a certain way and I, we should just say in collaboration with the class 12, you know collaboration or class collaboration.
10:24:14 I mean we don't have to lift all list all the institutions in class but I think for things like tea bags and darkly which are kind of, you know, not as well known, might be to our advantage to list it okay it's something to think about.
10:24:25 Yeah, yeah.
10:24:29 And then somewhere I think there's a table where we have to give projected end dates of the students, there's no right.
10:24:38 Usually, Yeah, there's a summary table of students and,
10:24:46 Yeah, I forget it's in one of the dependencies, or at least it used to be.
10:24:53 Yeah.
10:24:53 So I mean, probably.
10:24:57 I mean, we definitely want to be somewhat conservative so just maybe for him in FY 22. I mean, and for Bobby sang back and Patrick FY 23 or something like that, you know, I mean if you finish early it's not a problem but we need to have some indication.
10:25:17 Yeah, actually I noticed in the text you had demon ending in 2014 for
10:25:24 human ending and Tony, I didn't write.
10:25:29 Did I think it's a typo but yeah I don't believe I wrote that are absolutely, I didn't believe I wrote anything about anybody and that's what I brought it up so okay yeah yeah so that those kinds of things are you know consistencies reporting to get it
10:25:44 right.
10:25:44 But other than that, I think it's a strong proposal, I think, you know, compared to where we were three years ago I think it's much more focused and, you know,
10:25:57 grounded in Rails activity so I think, feel good.
10:26:04 All right, so let's go around, see what's going on.
10:26:09 Sang back Bobby Did you Bobby did I think you're usually first have any update.
10:26:14 Yeah sure, I'll go first. I'm Leslie it didn't get much progress done on actual analysis last week, took some time for a proposal and then there's this issue from last week of computing, where max who is getting Christophe Christophe houses group I think
10:26:33 kind of runs, I might be incorrect on that but anyways. He is the main guy from engine tier two facilities. It looked like basically a class 12 was running jobs very inefficiently on the order of, you know, seven core is being idol or something like this
10:26:50 for every one core that was running.
10:26:53 This is obviously a huge issue, but, you know, after some, you know, zoom calls and some deeper investigation. It was just a mismatch of accounting systems, and I think everyone involved now is fully confident that things are running correctly, which
10:27:09 is really good to see. The other thing is that there's an issue on Jay labs and of basically like input output on some of their management servers.
10:27:20 And this also got resolved with the past week with a little bit of elbow grease, so that's good.
10:27:26 And then as far as myself actually getting analysis done so I can eventually graduate his work with shushing on incorporating the Python generator to run on Jay lab systems, kind of natively.
10:27:42 And I am confident that this week that will be finally integrated will be allowed me to run simulations, about, in order of two to three times faster because I'll just generate things on the worker nodes and sort of linearly.
10:27:58 So that's good. As far as technical updates on the analysis, cross section, I don't have much to discuss this.
10:28:06 But from last week but I'm geared towards making progress on this week.
10:28:14 Great.
10:28:17 Saying back, please.
10:28:22 I have some updates.
10:28:26 Well, you were in I are working on Pizer so contamination issues.
10:28:37 A thing I already.
10:28:40 So, so some
10:28:44 thoughts at the only proposal, so.
10:28:54 Okay.
10:28:54 So, I have to kind of simulation, one is from the VCs solution, and one is a division of simulation and the other one is pleasure isolation that Bobby's and.
10:29:06 So, the black ones are from data.
10:29:12 And I have green and red. Now I forgot what it's the green one is from Pizer assimilation and red one is from delicious revelation.
10:29:28 And I can estimate contamination ratio and then if I make a linear combination of these variables.
10:29:37 I can make up the blue one. Which one is probably certainly, probably from simulation but they're very good remember with experiment, it so they are independent of experiment.
10:29:52 But this is about the electrons up.
10:29:57 But if I look at protons, or photon rated variables, they are not very well in agreement probably some momentum correction is an issue.
10:30:07 So I also work on momentum correction and.
10:30:14 So, this is one thing that I can show the this y axis is actually the, the correction of French inhalation, that when I know generated momentum and reconstructing the moment.
10:30:29 This is generated momentum subtracted from the other. Yeah.
10:30:39 Actually, subtracted from the reconstruction momentum and access is actually is from the missing massacred et, which I can apply for the real data, because I don't have to think like a generated data to know the momentum in experimental data.
10:31:05 try to reconstruct this link with experimentally accessible as possible.
10:31:15 So objective, it's like missing massacred, etc. And they have strong correlation so I'm excited to to apply this or experimental data.
10:31:27 And also I was trying to send an email to delicious DMP group about my simulation, because simulation is now apparent ready I think. So, this is sister Taiwan simulation, I put some argument about division, I can set up the number of events and number
10:31:48 of Johnson and someone is will will give me a simulation. But the thing is that it's not only me but there are several people that are interested in Division simulations, so I don't want to make a duplication so probably, I want to be in consensus of
10:32:06 the arguments, and then I'm going to shoot an email to division MP.
10:32:14 So,
10:32:19 these are the things.
10:32:24 And maybe the agreement with the mean if I'm interpreting it correctly.
10:32:30 I mean a plot mainly the plots you put in the report and the three year grant agreement between simulation and data has is pretty good. And it's less about defy all these variables or from electrons and foot some direction.
10:32:48 protons like for example missing massacred. They are not in very well agreement. So I think there should be a moment of friction issue about China and I believe angle, itself, is ok, but I think some will be electron kinematics.
10:33:15 That has nothing is believable from this experiment if we don't, you know, you don't get that right so. Exactly. So I think that's the right way to think about it.
10:33:25 Use that them into kind of bootstrap the proton.
10:33:43 I mean, I had to look at Lexus first single
10:33:38 version is is a black one. I was a data, and the blue one is a simulation. Yes, but simulation for the VCs process or for the VP zero.
10:34:01 So, the red one is delicious. The blue, green one is
10:33:58 the red one is it by zero, and the blue one is a combination of tourism. Exactly.
10:34:05 So for example did Paul boss green one and that one does not explain this. The black ones shape, but their combination, explains very well. I think that is a good sign.
10:34:19 Yeah, that's what they want, what they want.
10:34:21 Okay.
10:34:25 Okay. Yeah but, but probably the most important thing is the missing mascara, or missing energy like that so I'm not sure what we really want to understand about it so,
10:34:38 so, so you wrote in the proposal that you're going to have preliminary results in the summer if I read correctly.
10:34:45 And I think a momentum correction issue. If it's resolved it technically other corrections are just very well known. So, only the cluster else that's the thing is I think part.
10:35:15 paper.
10:35:19 That's my plan.
10:35:20 Good.
10:35:24 Patrick.
10:35:27 Yeah, so I've just been working on.
10:35:31 You know APS is kind of fast approaching so I've just been working on trying to, you know, generate some results for that. And so I've been focusing a lot on simulation later had been running into some difficulties with running it on you know she lately
10:35:47 but, but it seems to be working pretty well now so you hopefully make some good progress over the next.
10:35:55 You know week, and certainly over the next few weeks.
10:36:00 Actually I wanted to ask a question to to Bobby and saying back only because they, they kind of went through this whole all these class of hurdles for the last APS meeting.
10:36:11 I guess what like what is the timeline so Marco did send this email around kind of roughly laying out a timeline.
10:36:18 We're looks like we have to submit, like, like an analysis note in by.
10:36:29 What is this April 5.
10:36:35 And then, What's that happens.
10:36:38 It wasn't this happens, a while maybe he also sent me but I'm looking at this email by Marco on, on March 10.
10:36:48 And then like when do we have, we should we have to present it the working group meeting to right.
10:36:59 Yes, that's what we did in DMP.
10:37:04 But we'll pick your war more interested in DMP and there were more presenters so I'm not sure if this campaign will be more intense.
10:37:17 Okay, So you think might be a little different from, from the fall.
10:37:22 Because the one, the one light and understand and Marcus email was he says, Please note that the working group does not endorse approval of physics results presented for the first time to the working group so I wasn't exactly sure what that meant.
10:37:39 Is this is probably from the issue that happened between last sermon FX.
10:37:45 This is probably from the issue that happened between SM and FX. So, this is the tension of it.
10:37:48 Marco his color clarifying we cannot present anything if it wasn't endorsed by, by working group. So I said, okay, but for only they were not say anything like you didn't, you really cannot present to this day because if it's not too aggressive and not,
10:38:13 like, yeah, just.
10:38:14 Yeah, so all it means is you have to run it by the working group before bringing it to APS. Exactly. Yeah, that's understandable but it's not that strict.
10:38:23 Yeah.
10:38:24 Okay, okay, I just just trying to figure out all this, you know, red tape.
10:38:34 Alright, sounds good. Jane.
10:38:49 Okay.
10:38:39 Yeah so finally I got the jump for Ronnie on my laptop, I mean the interactive mode, because I was following Morris instruction, but due to some newly released software issue the instruction needs to be modified somehow and I, it took a little bit time
10:39:02 for me to find the trick there. But eventually, it works on, so I'm going to talk tomorrow, today about iPhone another bug in the GMC framework and that needs him to fix that.
10:39:24 And the other topic is last Tuesday Maury wrist issue is the, the web portal, the web interface of the cast of generator submission.
10:39:41 We want to add more features to that web page, and I talked to Bobby, to understand what was going on with that before. And the next I think I will work with Maury to realize this, so those features will help us to better understand, like how the drops
10:40:02 are running on different course of Osg, etc. So, I guess something like this but I still need to talk more today.
10:40:14 To confirm the details.
10:40:20 Yeah, basically this is our time on.
10:40:26 Right, that's, that's important.
10:40:28 streamline and make most efficient use of now the computing resources that I might take for class.
10:40:35 Very good. Igor, please.
10:40:40 Yeah. So, last week I mainly work on their presentations that they gave yesterday AMC. A SOC workshop.
10:40:53 So, it's now behind me and come back design analysis, work on their paper to proceed actually wanted to ask a question. So, for example, we have some of those domains three mins analysis like a calculator cross sections.
10:41:11 But if you have a different approaches like what they think about the looking on two different variations, who can vary we can raise this stuff in the, in the General LDBMP meeting.
10:41:27 Okay, that's a very good question. That leads me to the next. So I got an email last night from Boca burgers card to Kim zone and myself basically suggesting that we should start up the meeting and he suggested noon on Wednesday, which is good because
10:41:41 I, I, I'm done teaching, so.
10:41:46 So I guess the question is, so he was saying we you know we ice agreed and I said I would talk to you all.
10:41:53 It just seems to me like the meetings useful and I think from our side. You know I don't think this is a long set of presentations, but like an update on the Monte Carlo at MIT, just telling people, maybe a status report on the kind of results that saying
10:42:12 back show you know this page zero background looks. I mean, it looks it looks like an interesting, you know, conclusion. And then, you know, Igor is working on the Rosenbluth, you know, trying to pursue that particularly with using high energy data.
10:42:30 So I guess the suggestion was that we have a meeting where we're where we have these contributions. So what do you think.
10:42:40 Yeah, because, you know, is it. We are doing our analysis meetings on Fridays, but they be cooking inside, inside ourselves so you know sometimes we have a remote site or from the bigger group I think it will be very efficient.
10:42:57 For example, one of the corrections inside, somebody do for the momentum is doing the correction is the generated and reconstructed or both from the simulation.
10:43:07 Am I correct Sunday.
10:43:12 Sorry, can you repeat your practice is generated and reconstructed momentum was electrons and protons in the simulation, or both from the simulation you are not using the data to find the correction.
10:43:27 Of course, but I can see that if I draw this Mr AP versus energy part of momentum I can see the shift. So, I'm yep so yeah but that means that this is a correction is based on it is a simulation.
10:43:46 I expect to have. Okay.
10:43:50 Compared to experimental data, and then defines a correction. Okay so eager so what I did is, if I don't know the simulation old momentum correction, how can I, how can I expect that from only experimentally accessible data.
10:44:05 So that's what I showed
10:44:07 you. I mean, there's a couple of some, some features that need to be under style. Yeah, so okay so the question is, is it so sang back Bobby Joe Jane Are you
10:44:27 are you interested in giving a short presentation on these matters to the DVP meeting.
10:44:37 This tomorrow.
10:44:39 Well, that was the next question when it doesn't have to be fine I want to start a discussion of simulations so.
10:44:51 Yes, why not.
10:44:54 So, okay, so what.
10:44:58 So what do you want to present I mean III said yeah I propose something but maybe you feel differently I mean I guess I'm trying to understand, no it doesn't have to be tomorrow is when we're ready to do it but I guess the question is do we want to do
10:45:09 it.
10:45:11 I think it would be useful to have interaction with the broader group you know with some frequency
10:45:18 and let them know what you're doing, you know, it's just, I don't think we, they know so
10:45:29 i think it's, I think this is definitely something I could do.
10:45:36 I think I would probably have a, I would say, two weeks I think would be a good timeline to have a proper presentation of the gospel on my end. I'm not speaking for any.
10:45:48 So that's a presentation on what.
10:46:01 Um, I guess it would be kind of
10:45:58 a discussion on this effort to extract it up and
10:46:05 I'll be talking about.
10:46:06 Oh, okay.
10:46:11 generators then you know I'm fully confident that some of that people will point out things to me that I'm doing wrong, which is great. Yeah, exactly, that's fine I think that's what you want.
10:46:24 Exactly, but I would like, I think, a little bit more time, just, that's fine.
10:46:30 So, so that's Bobby, so signed back when when would you like to move on. I'm probably next week is preferred.
10:46:42 Probably next week is preferred. The same Okay, and what would what would it be on a per way above my status.
10:46:49 Prior to it. Yes, there is a BBC yes analysis was that, yes, and
10:46:58 I'm judging Would you be willing to talk about the Monte Carlo, just a general kind of update on on the Monte Carlo.
10:47:13 I'm not sure if this Monte Carlo.
10:47:13 Should we focus on a related to the cross section analysis or like more general general oh it's just the general it's not it's, it's just an update it doesn't have to be a long presentation but
10:47:31 I think just informing them we bought these the computing equipment we install them they're working you're working on the interface.
10:47:39 You can also talk about the polarized target work you're doing for helium three, I don't know, just seems like an update on simulations.
10:47:52 Yeah, yeah, I mean, I can do that in a week that in a week. Um,
10:48:02 yeah because I'm currently also considering about the April. April meeting the Monte Carlo talk. Yeah, I think that would be it would be good. I don't know if.
10:48:17 Okay. So what you're saying is you would give your talk, basically.
10:48:24 I mean, I can, I can give the kind of similar talk on this TV. The, the VCs meeting.
10:48:34 Like similar content to the, to the April meeting but just to be clear, this meeting is, is much broader than the VCs it's deeply virtual event processes so give me.
10:48:46 Yes.
10:48:47 It's everything you know applying on the fly and, but you know it has senior people in the cloud like Volkers they're killing us on there, they're the leaders of the experiment so it's.
10:48:59 I mean, sometimes it wanders into the weeds and in many ways but but I think, given that we haven't had it in a while, and I think you have been doing a lot of work I think it would be good just to.
10:49:14 Yeah.
10:49:14 Give an updated on that, you know, it doesn't have to be long, but I think, so when when would you like to do that.
10:49:21 I'm probably in.
10:49:23 Let me see.
10:49:26 Like to one to two weeks. Okay, so two weeks I also. Okay, that's fine.
10:49:33 And then Igor you're working on the resin blows and you're, you know.
10:49:40 Yeah, I think that they don't need to call it throws and blow because we look at some time, they started with zeros and blue but okay well, we need to rephrase is maybe looking at the ratios for okay well whatever you're working on analysis.
10:49:56 So, at some point I mean, when you're ready, I'm sure.
10:50:00 I don't know when you would want to talk but let's see how it goes for four weeks or something. Yeah, somebody else say that. Okay. I just wanted to come back with some, some kind of front rescheduled of.
10:50:15 OK, so I'll say sang back a week from tomorrow and then Bobby, and judging in about two weeks and then Igor.
10:50:24 After that you know in three weeks or something.
10:50:27 Okay.
10:50:28 Thanks not.
10:50:30 Well, I hope we hear other contributions that are interesting to
10:50:36 should, should we be scheduling, some rehearsals for the APS talks.
10:50:45 If the speakers want to absolutely yeah, if you want to do that.
10:50:52 There was some message sent around that they wanted talks uploaded by the, what was it the seventh of April.
10:51:07 Yes, the seven but it's optional for live presenters.
10:51:12 Okay, okay. When is the APS meeting.
10:51:17 Well depends if you count the hydraulic physics group, then that starts on the 13th of April, the APS itself starts on the 17th and runs to the 20th
10:51:34 overlapping the little minute what's the 13, the hydraulic if you call it, you know the group on hydraulic physics.
10:51:42 Okay, the topical group. Okay. Now, there's some workshop or something.
10:51:46 Yeah.
10:51:48 I mean, they should be a law against you know the extend these meetings to be a week long and, I mean, there's just too many things going on. It's crazy.
10:52:01 Yeah and Jay is is going on at the same time, is our.
10:52:05 Anyway, enough said but ok so I mean, we certainly have plenty of time, I mean today is on ey the 23rd of March, so why don't why don't the people who are presenting figure out if if and when you want to dry run.
10:52:23 Um, so yeah that's fine with me.
10:52:28 I'm giving a talk on T packs, and I've already said that I would present it to the collaboration on the April five Monte Carlo meeting, and I think maybe Patrick would do.
10:52:47 I'm not Patrick.
10:52:49 Ethan, Ethan, give me a token, and I've gotten word also talk then.
10:52:56 Yeah, Patrick is of course talking about class 12 so
10:53:04 yeah i know i think dry runs are definitely a good idea. Now, and for the short talks they don't take much time so no it's rather trivial I'm sure run through them over the virtual beer some weekend.
10:53:21 So what's happening with the D VCs meetings now at that used to be 1030 on Wednesdays and that's what I talked about, they've been happening. And so I got an email from Bulger suggesting to have them at noon, which suits me you know he finally realized
10:53:39 I guess he wants our group and he probably should schedule at a time where I can be available so anyway so I responded positively I said yeah I think it's a good idea at the time works but and I, we were meeting today and I would check and see if people
10:53:54 wanted to talk so now I think I have a whole set of presentation from our side over the next three or four weeks so
10:54:04 okay but nothing tomorrow.
10:54:06 I don't know. Yeah, I'm not aware I think it's too late tomorrow. Yeah, I think let's get it going. I think as we've said there is some value to it. I mean, as I said, sometimes it's a bit long winded but it's all right but I think there is value, particularly
10:54:22 is, you know, to peer is actually making progress on producing.
10:54:29 Another a lot of experience people on this.
10:54:33 So I think it's good.
10:54:35 Okay. No, that's fine.
10:54:37 No, I'm happy to have it at 12 o'clock. I think that's works.
10:54:48 Oh.