For the efficiency vs E fit of the 90degree Xray detector I have used the following phenomenological funciton:

f(x) = a * (1-exp(-(x-c)/b)) * exp(-x/d)

Here the first exponent member is a saturation curve. This part describes the passing through of the two Be windows (chamber + before detector) and through the dead layer of Ge crystal. One needs a minimum energy to enter to the detecting Ge crystal = C parameter. b parameter = characteristic absorbtion E of these nondetecting layers.
The second exponent is an exponential decrease of the detector efficiency. Photons with higher energy are less detectable by the germaniums. The d parameter is the characteristic E for hard Xray and gamma (>40keV) detectability. 

https://www.amptek.com/internal-products/si-pin-vs-cdte-comparison

//Jan's comment: the tail of this function should more or less follow a linear trend a bit above than 40 keV.


In the attachment there is an example fit for 90 degree with combined 1. and 2. (before and after beamtime) calibration datasets. 
I made the fit with gnuplot:

degrees of freedom    (FIT_NDF)                        : 8
rms of residuals      (FIT_STDFIT) = sqrt(WSSR/ndf)    : 0.419915
variance of residuals (reduced chisquare) = WSSR/ndf   : 0.176329
p-value of the Chisq distribution (FIT_P)              : 0.994094

Final set of parameters            Asymptotic Standard Error
=======================            ==========================
a               = 0.00308376       +/- 0.0005144    (16.68%)
c               = 15.6259          +/- 2.035        (13.03%)
b               = 9.36888          +/- 3.16         (33.73%)
d               = 177.141          +/- 84.95        (47.95%)

Laszlo's out.

For all 3 detector the calibration data sets were combined to include the systematics in the fit results directly. Combining means not a weighted average, just simple all data points were included into the fit --> doubled efficiency value for most of the energies.
The g(x) = a * (1-exp(-(x-c)/b)) * exp(-x/d) function was used to describe the behavior of the Germanium detectors for the whole range of energies (global behavior). From these fits the 80keV outlier point was excluded. This is very strange that it doesn't follow the trend, it would be nice to find out why not.
Between 40-75keV a linear fit was carried out as well. This can also approximate quite well this local energy range, what we need for the K-REC peaks.
l(x) = m*x+e

All the fits were done by gnuplot, but it was also confirmed that ROOT gives us the same parameters + errors + chisquare. One just need to choose well the starting values :)


90° fits:
degrees of freedom    (FIT_NDF)                        : 8
rms of residuals      (FIT_STDFIT) = sqrt(WSSR/ndf)    : 0.419915
variance of residuals (reduced chisquare) = WSSR/ndf   : 0.176329
p-value of the Chisq distribution (FIT_P)              : 0.994094

Final set of parameters            Asymptotic Standard Error
=======================            ==========================
a               = 0.00308376       +/- 0.0005144    (16.68%)
c               = 15.6259          +/- 2.035        (13.03%)
b               = 9.36888          +/- 3.16         (33.73%)
d               = 177.141          +/- 84.95        (47.95%)

degrees of freedom    (FIT_NDF)                        : 4
rms of residuals      (FIT_STDFIT) = sqrt(WSSR/ndf)    : 0.283372
variance of residuals (reduced chisquare) = WSSR/ndf   : 0.0802998
p-value of the Chisq distribution (FIT_P)              : 0.988405

Final set of parameters            Asymptotic Standard Error
=======================            ==========================
m               = -6.22672e-06     +/- 1.836e-06    (29.48%)
e               = 0.00256426       +/- 9.873e-05    (3.85%)



145° fits:
degrees of freedom    (FIT_NDF)                        : 6
rms of residuals      (FIT_STDFIT) = sqrt(WSSR/ndf)    : 0.379472
variance of residuals (reduced chisquare) = WSSR/ndf   : 0.143999
p-value of the Chisq distribution (FIT_P)              : 0.990247

Final set of parameters            Asymptotic Standard Error
=======================            ==========================
a               = 0.0012346        +/- 0.0006794    (55.03%)
c               = 11.3754          +/- 4.075        (35.82%)
b               = 15.6961          +/- 13.2         (84.1%)
d               = 116.084          +/- 99.83        (86%)

degrees of freedom    (FIT_NDF)                        : 2
rms of residuals      (FIT_STDFIT) = sqrt(WSSR/ndf)    : 0.327728
variance of residuals (reduced chisquare) = WSSR/ndf   : 0.107405
p-value of the Chisq distribution (FIT_P)              : 0.898161

Final set of parameters            Asymptotic Standard Error
=======================            ==========================
m               = -2.39246e-06     +/- 1.278e-06    (53.42%)
e               = 0.000848859      +/- 7.329e-05    (8.634%)



35° fit:
degrees of freedom    (FIT_NDF)                        : 7
rms of residuals      (FIT_STDFIT) = sqrt(WSSR/ndf)    : 1.40676
variance of residuals (reduced chisquare) = WSSR/ndf   : 1.97896
p-value of the Chisq distribution (FIT_P)              : 0.0538635

Final set of parameters            Asymptotic Standard Error
=======================            ==========================
a               = 0.000114396      +/- 0.0002367    (206.9%)
c               = 14.3178          +/- 8.322        (58.13%)
b               = 16.7454          +/- 43.21        (258%)
d               = 79.7991          +/- 173.2        (217.1%)

degrees of freedom    (FIT_NDF)                        : 3
rms of residuals      (FIT_STDFIT) = sqrt(WSSR/ndf)    : 1.21233
variance of residuals (reduced chisquare) = WSSR/ndf   : 1.46975
p-value of the Chisq distribution (FIT_P)              : 0.220529

Final set of parameters            Asymptotic Standard Error
=======================            ==========================
m               = -3.7879e-07      +/- 3.143e-07    (82.99%)
e               = 7.31447e-05      +/- 1.788e-05    (24.45%)



> For the efficiency vs E fit of the 90degree Xray detector I have used the following phenomenological funciton:
> 
> f(x) = a * (1-exp(-(x-c)/b)) * exp(-x/d)
> 
> Here the first exponent member is a saturation curve. This part describes the passing through of the two Be windows (chamber + before detector) and through the dead layer of Ge crystal. One needs a minimum energy to enter to the detecting Ge crystal = C parameter. b parameter = characteristic absorbtion E of these nondetecting layers.
> The second exponent is an exponential decrease of the detector efficiency. Photons with higher energy are less detectable by the germaniums. The d parameter is the characteristic E for hard Xray and gamma (>40keV) detectability. 
> 
> https://www.amptek.com/internal-products/si-pin-vs-cdte-comparison
> 
> //Jan's comment: the tail of this function should more or less follow a linear trend a bit above than 40 keV.
> 
> 
> In the attachment there is an example fit for 90 degree with combined 1. and 2. (before and after beamtime) calibration datasets. 
> I made the fit with gnuplot:
> 
> degrees of freedom    (FIT_NDF)                        : 8
> rms of residuals      (FIT_STDFIT) = sqrt(WSSR/ndf)    : 0.419915
> variance of residuals (reduced chisquare) = WSSR/ndf   : 0.176329
> p-value of the Chisq distribution (FIT_P)              : 0.994094
> 
> Final set of parameters            Asymptotic Standard Error
> =======================            ==========================
> a               = 0.00308376       +/- 0.0005144    (16.68%)
> c               = 15.6259          +/- 2.035        (13.03%)
> b               = 9.36888          +/- 3.16         (33.73%)
> d               = 177.141          +/- 84.95        (47.95%)
> 
> Laszlo's out.

I have made also the inverse square law fits. We have data only for 90degre with the 241Am source, but both for the 1. and 2. calibrations. The 1. and 2. calibration data sets treated separate.
2 peaks were investigated, 59.5keV and 26.3keV, at two distances 184.8mm and 217.3mm. These distances are the sum of 4 distances:
a = width of plastic head. uncert.: +/- 0.05mm, measured with caliper.
b = width of the brass collimator. uncert.: +/- 0.05mm, measured with caliper.
c = width of protector plastic ring. uncert.: +/- 0.05mm, measured with caliper.
d= distance of the paper head. uncert: +/- 0.5mm, judged by the eye :)

The Be window and the dead layer of the Ge detector is not taken into account.

The distances calculated as D=a+b+c+d.

The conclusion is that the uncertainty coming from the distance measurements are negligible compared to the other uncertainties. The data obey the inverse square law.


> For all 3 detector the calibration data sets were combined to include the systematics in the fit results directly. Combining means not a weighted average, just simple all data points were included into the fit --> doubled efficiency value for most of the energies.
> The g(x) = a * (1-exp(-(x-c)/b)) * exp(-x/d) function was used to describe the behavior of the Germanium detectors for the whole range of energies (global behavior). From these fits the 80keV outlier point was excluded. This is very strange that it doesn't follow the trend, it would be nice to find out why not.
> Between 40-75keV a linear fit was carried out as well. This can also approximate quite well this local energy range, what we need for the K-REC peaks.
> l(x) = m*x+e
> 
> All the fits were done by gnuplot, but it was also confirmed that ROOT gives us the same parameters + errors + chisquare. One just need to choose well the starting values :)
> 
> 
> 90° fits:
> degrees of freedom    (FIT_NDF)                        : 8
> rms of residuals      (FIT_STDFIT) = sqrt(WSSR/ndf)    : 0.419915
> variance of residuals (reduced chisquare) = WSSR/ndf   : 0.176329
> p-value of the Chisq distribution (FIT_P)              : 0.994094
> 
> Final set of parameters            Asymptotic Standard Error
> =======================            ==========================
> a               = 0.00308376       +/- 0.0005144    (16.68%)
> c               = 15.6259          +/- 2.035        (13.03%)
> b               = 9.36888          +/- 3.16         (33.73%)
> d               = 177.141          +/- 84.95        (47.95%)
> 
> degrees of freedom    (FIT_NDF)                        : 4
> rms of residuals      (FIT_STDFIT) = sqrt(WSSR/ndf)    : 0.283372
> variance of residuals (reduced chisquare) = WSSR/ndf   : 0.0802998
> p-value of the Chisq distribution (FIT_P)              : 0.988405
> 
> Final set of parameters            Asymptotic Standard Error
> =======================            ==========================
> m               = -6.22672e-06     +/- 1.836e-06    (29.48%)
> e               = 0.00256426       +/- 9.873e-05    (3.85%)
> 
> 
> 
> 145° fits:
> degrees of freedom    (FIT_NDF)                        : 6
> rms of residuals      (FIT_STDFIT) = sqrt(WSSR/ndf)    : 0.379472
> variance of residuals (reduced chisquare) = WSSR/ndf   : 0.143999
> p-value of the Chisq distribution (FIT_P)              : 0.990247
> 
> Final set of parameters            Asymptotic Standard Error
> =======================            ==========================
> a               = 0.0012346        +/- 0.0006794    (55.03%)
> c               = 11.3754          +/- 4.075        (35.82%)
> b               = 15.6961          +/- 13.2         (84.1%)
> d               = 116.084          +/- 99.83        (86%)
> 
> degrees of freedom    (FIT_NDF)                        : 2
> rms of residuals      (FIT_STDFIT) = sqrt(WSSR/ndf)    : 0.327728
> variance of residuals (reduced chisquare) = WSSR/ndf   : 0.107405
> p-value of the Chisq distribution (FIT_P)              : 0.898161
> 
> Final set of parameters            Asymptotic Standard Error
> =======================            ==========================
> m               = -2.39246e-06     +/- 1.278e-06    (53.42%)
> e               = 0.000848859      +/- 7.329e-05    (8.634%)
> 
> 
> 
> 35° fit:
> degrees of freedom    (FIT_NDF)                        : 7
> rms of residuals      (FIT_STDFIT) = sqrt(WSSR/ndf)    : 1.40676
> variance of residuals (reduced chisquare) = WSSR/ndf   : 1.97896
> p-value of the Chisq distribution (FIT_P)              : 0.0538635
> 
> Final set of parameters            Asymptotic Standard Error
> =======================            ==========================
> a               = 0.000114396      +/- 0.0002367    (206.9%)
> c               = 14.3178          +/- 8.322        (58.13%)
> b               = 16.7454          +/- 43.21        (258%)
> d               = 79.7991          +/- 173.2        (217.1%)
> 
> degrees of freedom    (FIT_NDF)                        : 3
> rms of residuals      (FIT_STDFIT) = sqrt(WSSR/ndf)    : 1.21233
> variance of residuals (reduced chisquare) = WSSR/ndf   : 1.46975
> p-value of the Chisq distribution (FIT_P)              : 0.220529
> 
> Final set of parameters            Asymptotic Standard Error
> =======================            ==========================
> m               = -3.7879e-07      +/- 3.143e-07    (82.99%)
> e               = 7.31447e-05      +/- 1.788e-05    (24.45%)
> 
> 
> 
> > For the efficiency vs E fit of the 90degree Xray detector I have used the following phenomenological funciton:
> > 
> > f(x) = a * (1-exp(-(x-c)/b)) * exp(-x/d)
> > 
> > Here the first exponent member is a saturation curve. This part describes the passing through of the two Be windows (chamber + before detector) and through the dead layer of Ge crystal. One needs a minimum energy to enter to the detecting Ge crystal = C parameter. b parameter = characteristic absorbtion E of these nondetecting layers.
> > The second exponent is an exponential decrease of the detector efficiency. Photons with higher energy are less detectable by the germaniums. The d parameter is the characteristic E for hard Xray and gamma (>40keV) detectability. 
> > 
> > https://www.amptek.com/internal-products/si-pin-vs-cdte-comparison
> > 
> > //Jan's comment: the tail of this function should more or less follow a linear trend a bit above than 40 keV.
> > 
> > 
> > In the attachment there is an example fit for 90 degree with combined 1. and 2. (before and after beamtime) calibration datasets. 
> > I made the fit with gnuplot:
> > 
> > degrees of freedom    (FIT_NDF)                        : 8
> > rms of residuals      (FIT_STDFIT) = sqrt(WSSR/ndf)    : 0.419915
> > variance of residuals (reduced chisquare) = WSSR/ndf   : 0.176329
> > p-value of the Chisq distribution (FIT_P)              : 0.994094
> > 
> > Final set of parameters            Asymptotic Standard Error
> > =======================            ==========================
> > a               = 0.00308376       +/- 0.0005144    (16.68%)
> > c               = 15.6259          +/- 2.035        (13.03%)
> > b               = 9.36888          +/- 3.16         (33.73%)
> > d               = 177.141          +/- 84.95        (47.95%)
> > 
> > Laszlo's out.

Here is a representation how was the time management during E127. The time, what we could spend with measuring the 118Te(pg), was ~20% comparing to the given 6days.

• measurement
  d1 = moved back from beam = 15 +/-.5 mm
  d2 = DSSSD frame width = 8.85 mm
  d3 = pg center on DSSSD = 7-7.5 bin = 21.7-23.2 mm = avg = 22.5 mm
  
  --> pg from beam in x = -46.4mm +/- 1.5mm
  --> pg on DSSSD from center ~ -3.28mm +/- 1.5mm
  
  
• simulation
  x = -46.5 mm
  y = 0 mm
  
  
• detector active area position
  x = (-73.35mm) - (-23.85mm)
  y = (-14.2195mm) - 23.5125mm
  
  
• SCRAPING: x=-35mm +/-0.5mm away from beam
  y=(-20mm) - (40mm)
  
  

• measurement
  d1 = moved back from beam = 16 +/-.5 mm
  d2 = DSSSD frame width = 8.85 mm
  d3 = pg center on DSSSD = 7.5 bin = 23.2 mm
  
  --> pg from beam in x = -48.05mm +/- 1.5mm
  --> pg on DSSSD from center ~ -3.28mm +/- 1.5mm
  
  
• simulation
  x = -48 mm
  y = 0 mm
  
  
• detector active area position
  x = (-74.35mm) - (-24.85mm)
  y = (-14.2195mm) - 23.5125mm
  
  
• SCRAPING:
  x=-35mm +/-0.5mm away from beam
  y=(-20mm) - (40mm)
  
  
  

Si HV and current was switched in the last documentation.

The vacuum remained in the E-10 range after moving the dsssd. The oscillation in the vacuum.values are due to the 
magnets ramping up and down

//a simple code (template) for offline analysis
//made by Laszlo, serves as a simple demonstration for enthusiastic shifters
//it creates a "no double counting Si 2D pos" histo
//usage:
//
//save the file as eg. "simple_code.c"
//root -l
//.L simple_code.c++
//run()
//when counter finished: ".q"

#define INPUT1 "input.root"//first unpack the lmd, then give the path of the unpacked .root file.

#define OUTPUT "./"//folder of the output. minimum input: "./"

#define ROOT_NAME "dummy.root"//name of the output

#include <cmath>
#include <string>
#include <sstream>
#include <cstdlib>
#include <cstdio>
#include <ctime>
#include <fstream>
#include <iostream>
#include <stdint.h>
#include "TROOT.h"
#include "TAttText.h"
#include "TAxis.h"
#include "TCanvas.h"
#include "TChain.h"
#include "TCut.h"
#include "TF1.h"
#include "TFile.h"
#include "TGraph.h"
#include "TGraphAsymmErrors.h"
#include "TGraphErrors.h"
#include "TH1.h"
#include "TH2.h"
#include "THistPainter.h"
#include "TKey.h"
#include "TLatex.h"
#include "TLegend.h"
#include "TMath.h"
#include "TMatrixD.h"
#include "TMinuit.h"
#include "TMultiGraph.h"
#include "TNtuple.h"
#include "TPave.h"
#include "TPaveText.h"
#include "TPoint.h"
#include "TRandom.h"
#include "TRint.h"
#include "TStyle.h"
#include "TString.h"
#include "TTree.h"
#include "TH1F.h"
#include "TH2F.h"
#include "TSystem.h"
#include "TProfile.h"
#include "TVirtualFitter.h"
#include "TCanvas.h"
#include "TLegend.h"
#include "TColor.h"
#include <time.h>

using namespace std;

inline bool exists_test0 (const std::string& name) {
    ifstream f(name.c_str());
    return f.good();
}

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

void loop(TChain *fChain){
	
	//setting pedestal values
	int PEDESTAL_LOW=400;
	int PEDESTAL_HIGH=8000;
	

	//this normally should be in a separate header, branches are defined.
	UInt_t          trigger;
	fChain->SetBranchAddress("TRIGGER",&trigger);
	UInt_t          E_SiY[17];
	UInt_t          E_SiX[17];
	UInt_t          t_SiY[17];
	UInt_t          t_SiX[17];
	for(int a=1;a<17;a++){
		fChain->SetBranchAddress(Form("E_SiY%d",a),&E_SiY[a]);
		fChain->SetBranchAddress(Form("E_SiX%d",a),&E_SiX[a]);
		fChain->SetBranchAddress(Form("t_SiY%d",a),&t_SiY[a]);
		fChain->SetBranchAddress(Form("t_SiX%d",a),&t_SiX[a]);
	}

	//creating histos
	TH2D *h_pos_si_xy=new TH2D("h_pos_si_xy", "h_pos_si_xy",16,0.5,16.5,16,0.5,16.5);

	//creating and initializing some variables used in the event loop (for "no double counting")
	int r_pos_x=0,r_pos_y=0;
	int dc_Ex_max=-999;
	int dc_Ey_max=-999;
	
	
	Long64_t nentries = fChain->GetEntries();
	Long64_t nbytes = 0;

	//starting the entry loop
	for (Long64_t i=0; i<nentries;i++){

		nbytes += fChain->GetEntry(i);
		//event countdown
		if ((float(i)/100000.)==int(i/100000)){cout << "event: " << i << " \tof " << nentries << endl;}


		if(trigger==1){//trigger 1 = TargetON

			dc_Ex_max=-999;
			dc_Ey_max=-999;

			for(int i_x=1;i_x<17;i_x++){
				for(int i_y=1;i_y<17;i_y++){

					if( ((int)t_SiX[i_x])>0 && ((int)t_SiY[i_y])>0){
						if( PEDESTAL_LOW<((int)E_SiX[i_x]) && PEDESTAL_HIGH>((int)E_SiX[i_x]) &&
						    PEDESTAL_LOW<((int)E_SiY[i_y]) && PEDESTAL_HIGH>((int)E_SiY[i_y])){

							//assign the hit to StripX and StripY where the most energy is deposited (rel. Ecalibration is needed, but roughly ok)
							if(dc_Ex_max<((int)E_SiX[i_x]) && dc_Ey_max<((int)E_SiY[i_y])){
								r_pos_x=i_x;
								r_pos_y=i_y;
								dc_Ex_max=E_SiX[i_x];
								dc_Ey_max=E_SiY[i_y];
							}
						
						}
					}
					
				}
			}

			//Filling pos. histo
			if(dc_Ex_max!=-999 && dc_Ey_max!=-999){h_pos_si_xy	-> Fill(r_pos_x,r_pos_y);}
			
		}//trigger==1

	}//entry loop
	

	//writing out the root output file
	TFile *graphfile = TFile::Open((OUTPUT + (string)("") + ROOT_NAME).c_str(), "RECREATE");
	graphfile -> mkdir("map");
	graphfile -> cd("map");
	h_pos_si_xy -> Write();
	graphfile -> Close();

}//loop

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

void run(){

    const char *command = new char[1000];

    char filename[100];
    TChain *fChain = new TChain("h101");

    sprintf(filename,INPUT1);

    if(exists_test0(INPUT1) && exists_test0(OUTPUT)){

    cout<<"\033[0;37m//loading run: "<<filename << "\033[0m" <<endl;
    fChain->Add(filename);

    loop(fChain);
    }
    else{cout<<"\033[0;31mError 404: non-existing INPUT1 or OUTPUT file!\033[0m" <<endl;}

	command = "rm  *.so";
	gSystem->Exec(command);
	command = "rm  *.d";
	gSystem->Exec(command);

	return;
}

int main(){
    run();
    return(0);
}

for some reason the event number of the target ON and OFF was misaligned with the pattern.
This means that the last few runs (run53, run52...) measured not in the target on phase but one before (at 10 instead of 11). Therefore, with these 
runs we measured the TargetOFF phase instead TargetON (that is why the pg peak seem to disappear...)

The DSSSD is moved back to its measurement position(-25mm).

Si was moved from -25 mm to -19 mm before run 0072.

We found the beam axis with the scraper to be -17.5 mm.
The Scraper position set to +12.5 mm, 30 mm relative from the beam.

So far we did 3 scraping positions:
- 30mm away from beam axis (lmd72-75)
- 25mm away from beam axis (lmd78-80)
- 20mm away from beam axis (lmd76-77)

below one can see the comparison of the scrapings for the DSSSD spectrum. Please mind the different amount of data collected

The coefficients are produced only quick and dirty, S_x=1 was fixed to 1.
E = E_x = E_y = S_x*A_x = S_y*A_y

from 1-16: Si X channel
from 17-32: Si Y channel

S_param[1]=1;
S_param[2]=1.00953;
S_param[3]=1.00697;
S_param[4]=1.00506;
S_param[5]=0.985741;
S_param[6]=1.00338;
S_param[7]=0.998362;
S_param[8]=1.00424;
S_param[9]=0.998684;
S_param[10]=1.00029;
S_param[11]=1.01181;
S_param[12]=1.007;
S_param[13]=1.00927;
S_param[14]=1.00828;
S_param[15]=1.01399;
S_param[16]=0.995168;
S_param[17]=1.00612;
S_param[18]=1.01383;
S_param[19]=0.99964;
S_param[20]=1.03;
S_param[21]=1.00987;
S_param[22]=1.01913;
S_param[23]=0.993491;
S_param[24]=1.02393;
S_param[25]=1.00342;
S_param[26]=0.990515;
S_param[27]=0.986303;
S_param[28]=0.986874;
S_param[29]=1.00188;
S_param[30]=1.01761;
S_param[31]=0.995329;
S_param[32]=0.995247;

The UI-curve of the detector
U I
10 0.11
20 0.13
30 0.15
40 0.17
50 0.19
60 0.21
70 0.22
80 0.23
90 0.25
100 0.27
110 0.29
120 0.31
130 0.33
140 0.35
150 0.37