Double Differential Cross Sections and F
2
Final Plots
The plots collected on this page were derived from the 30 pb-1 of e+p data collected by ZEUS during running in 1996 and 1997.
These results supercede those presented at conferences prior to DIS01.
|
Figure 1: Schematic view of the ZEUS detector showing those components important for this analysis. |
||
|
Figure 2: Vertex finding efficiency as a function of the hadronic angle gamma(PT). |
||
|
Figure 3: Analysis binning, with (a)purity and (b) acceptance |
||
|
Figure 4: Photoproduction background information |
||
|
Figure 5: Distribution of measured quantities, for the low-Q2 sample (left) and the high-Q2 sample (right). The histograms are normalised according to the luminosity. |
||
|
Figure 6: Distributions of kinematic variables for the low-Q2 sample (left) and the high-Q2 sample (right). The histograms are normalised according to the luminosity |
||
|
Figure 7: a-d) The relative uncorrelated systematic, total systematic, statistical, and total systematic uncertainty. Three regions in Q2 are denoted by different symbols. e-h) Four typical sources of the correlated systematic uncertainty. |
||
|
Figure 8: a) The statistical uncertainty, and b) the systematic uncertainty, shown for the x-Q2 kinematic plane. |
||
|
Figure 9: F2(em) vs. x for fixed Q2 |
||
|
Figure 10: F2(em) vs. x for fixed Q2 |
||
|
Figure 11: F2(em) vs. x for fixed Q2 |
||
|
Figure 12: F2(em) vs. x for fixed Q2 |
||
|
Figure 13: F2(em) vs. Q2 for fixed x. The fixed-target results from NMC, BCDMS, and E665 and the ZEUS NLO QCD fit are also shown. |
||
|
Figure 14: F2(em) vs. Q2 for six bins at fixed x, compared with results from NMC, BCDMS, E665, and H1. |
||