Next: yield of all-neutral hadronic
Up: The model
Previous: the level 0 trigger
Figure 11:
Level 2 scaler rate vs. beam current measured at
the end of the June run period.
![\begin{figure}\begin{center}\mbox{\epsfxsize =9.0cm\epsffile{el2C.eps}}\end{center}\end{figure}](img70.png) |
The level 2 trigger processor makes a fast estimate of the total energy
in the lead glass wall and applies a threshold cut on this quantity.
Presumably the signal events are more likely to contain a large neutral
dose than nonsignal events. It is described within the model by the
following formula,
![\begin{displaymath}
{\cal F}_2 = \frac{
f_{2s}\,f_s\,{\cal F}_{true} +
f_{2n}\,(...
..._{acc.}
}{
f_s\,{\cal F}_{true} +
(f_n-f_s)\,{\cal F}_{acc.}
}
\end{displaymath}](img71.png) |
(14) |
where the input parameters
and
are the level 2 pass
fractions for level 0 triggers (noCP events) that are signal
(i.e. trues) and nonsignal (i.e. accidentals)
respectively. The data overlayed with the model fit are shown in
Fig. 11 for the scan taken at the end of the June period.
If the level 2 processor is doing its job then one would
expect that
which is what is observed.
Next: yield of all-neutral hadronic
Up: The model
Previous: the level 0 trigger
Richard T. Jones
2003-02-12