\documentclass[]{beamer}
\setbeamertemplate{navigation symbols}{}
\usepackage{beamerthemesplit}
\useoutertheme{infolines}
\usecolortheme{dolphin}
%\usetheme{Warsaw}
\usetheme{progressbar} 
\usecolortheme{progressbar}
\usefonttheme{progressbar}
\useoutertheme{progressbar}
\useinnertheme{progressbar}
\usepackage{graphicx}
%\usepackage{amssymb,amsmath}
\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\newcommand\abs[1]{\left|#1\right|}
\usepackage{iwona}
\progressbaroptions{imagename=images/lhcb}
%\usetheme{Boadilla}
 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5
\definecolor{mygreen}{cmyk}{0.82,0.11,1,0.25}
\setbeamertemplate{blocks}[rounded][shadow=false]
\addtobeamertemplate{block begin}{\pgfsetfillopacity{0.8}}{\pgfsetfillopacity{1}}
\setbeamercolor{structure}{fg=mygreen}
\setbeamercolor*{block title example}{fg=mygreen!50,
bg= blue!10}
\setbeamercolor*{block body example}{fg= blue,
bg= blue!5}
 
 
 
 
 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%\beamersetuncovermixins{\opaqueness<1>{25}}{\opaqueness<2->{15}}
\title{Update on measurement of Bose-Einstein Correlations}  
\author{\underline{Marcin Chrzaszcz}$^{1,2}$, Marcin Kucharczyk$^{1,3}$, Tadeusz Lesiak$^{1}$, Mariusz Witek$^{1}$}
 
\date{\today} 
 
\begin{document}
 
{
\institute{$^1$ Krakow,  $^2$ Zurych, $^3$ Milano}
\setbeamertemplate{footline}{} 
\begin{frame}
\logo{
\vspace{2 mm}
\includegraphics[height=1cm,keepaspectratio]{images/uzh.jpg}~
\includegraphics[height=1cm,keepaspectratio]{images/ifj.png}}
 
  \titlepage
\end{frame}
}
 
%\institute{UZH,IFJ} 
 
 
\section[Outline]{}
\begin{frame}
\tableofcontents
\end{frame}
 
%normal slides
\section{Reminder}
 
 
%\subsection{From interferometry to particle Physics}
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Reminder}
\begin{columns}
\column{2.8in}
\begin{itemize}
\item HBT interferometry can be used to study the diameters of source. 
\item For indistinguishable particles the phenomena is know as Bose-Einstein Correlations(BE).
\item BEC correlations occur as enhancement of same particles in the low $Q$ region.
\item We already observed the effects.
\end{itemize}
 
\column{2.2in}
\includegraphics[height=3.cm,keepaspectratio]{images/HBT.png}
 
\end{columns}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
 
\end{frame}
 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Results in 2011 data}
Enhancement at low $Q^2$ region. We selected $\mathcal{O}(10^8)$ $\pi$ pairs, and $\mathcal{O}(10^6)$ $K$ pairs.
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.2]{images/q_2011.png}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
 
 
 
 
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Results in 2011 data}
We can rewrite $Q$ in form:
\begin{equation}
Q=\sqrt{-2q_{\bot 1} q_{\bot 2}[cosh(y_1 -y_2)-cos(\phi_1-\phi_2)] }
\end{equation}
,where $y_i$ are the pseudo-rapidity, $\phi_i$ are azimuthal angles.
We see BEC 
\begin{columns}
\column{1.6in}
\includegraphics[scale=.2]{images/rap.png}
\column{1.6in}
\includegraphics[scale=.2]{images/rap_kaon.png}
\end{columns}
 
\end{frame}
 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%555
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Results in 2011 data}
We can rewrite $Q$ in form:
\begin{equation}
Q=\sqrt{-2q_{\bot 1} q_{\bot 2}[cosh(y_1 -y_2)-cos(\phi_1-\phi_2)] }
\end{equation}
,where $y_i$ are the pseudo-rapidity, $\phi_i$ are azimuthal angles.
We see BEC 
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.2]{images/phi_2011.png}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
 
\section{Systematics}
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Accessing the systematics}
\begin{itemize}
\item One of the main systematics that keep us awake in the night are contributions from clone tracks.
\item Potentially very dangerous because one expects them to peak on low $Q$ region only for same sign particles, like BEC.
\item We used  MC11 minBias MC sample, and tool from Chris Jones to study this effect.
 
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Systematics}
\begin{columns}
\column{2.5in}
Fraction of clones:
\begin{itemize}
\item pions: $(0.319 \pm 0.023) \% $
\item kaons: $(0.023 \pm 0.015) \%$
\item kaons: $(0.055 \pm 0.021) \%$
\end{itemize}
 
\column{3.5in}
\includegraphics[width=3.5cm]{images/clonesQ_Hist_to3GeV.pdf} \\
{~}\\
\includegraphics[width=3.5cm]{images/q1.png} \\
 
 
\end{columns}
 
\end{frame}
\section{MC/Data comparison}
\begin{frame}\frametitle{MC/Data comparison1}
We compared the same sample with data.
\begin{columns}
\column{2.5in}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.13]{new/pionlike_diffvtx.png}\\
\includegraphics[scale=.13]{new/pionlike.png}
\end{center}
\column{2.5in}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.13]{new/pionunlike_diffvtx.png}\\
\includegraphics[scale=.13]{new/pionunlike.png}
\end{center}
 
\end{columns}
 
\end{frame}
 
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{MC/Data comparison}
\begin{itemize}
\item We observed a big discrepancy between DATA and MC.
\item If we want to use this as reference sample we need to reweigh.
\item Do to limited statistics it's still suboptimal sample.
\item Could we ask for production of minBias siom08 7TeV?
 
\end{itemize}
 
\end{frame}
 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Coulomb effect}
\begin{columns}
\column{2.5in}
Fraction of clones:
\begin{itemize}
\item Using data we tried to verify the Coulomb effect in our sample.
\item Suing unlike pairs form the same and different PV.
\item Effect is visible but small.
\end{itemize}
 
\column{3.5in}
\includegraphics[width=6cm]{new/columb.png} \\
 
 
 
\end{columns}
 
\end{frame}
 
 
 
 
 
\section{Other activities.}
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{MC/Data comparison}
\begin{itemize}
\item We discussed with Vanya, and we will use double charm production stripping line for correlations in charm.
\item Line is being currently re striped, to take also the dicharm mass.
\item Alice published paper with first measurement of 3-body correlations (1310.7808).
\item This is a search a bit different to ours. We don't study the centrality and the halo is smaller in pp collisions.
\item But the fact remains they saw effects that could not be explained by any model.
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5
\section{Summary}
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Conclusions}
\begin{itemize}
\item We started accessing some of the systematics.
\item For now clones do not  work to scary.
\item Coulomb also is smaller then BEC.
\item MC clearly doesn't agree with Data, will try reweighing.
\end{itemize}
 
 
\end{frame}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5
 
 
 
 
 
\end{document}