1:
2: %\section{\bf Experimental procedure}
3:
4: The experiment was performed at the Laboratory of Nuclear Science (LNS)
5: in Tohoku University by using tagged photon beams from the 1.2 GeV
6: Stretcher-Booster Ring~\cite{STB}.
7: Two series of measurements were carried out in different setups:
8: the first one at the photon beam line 1 in the experimental hall 2 and
9: the second at the photon beam line 2 in the GeV-$\gamma$
10: experimental hall.
11: The former tagging system is described
12: in detail in Ref.~\cite{BM4tagger}
13: and a part of data obtained in the first series was reported in
14: Ref.~\cite{Yama2}.
15: Photon beams of the same quality can be used at both
16: beam lines. In the present work, the photon energy was covered
17: from 600 to 850~MeV
18: with $E_e$ = 920~MeV and from 800 to 1120~MeV with $E_e$ = 1200~MeV.
19: The total tagged photon intensity was about 10$^7$~Hz with a duty factor
20: of about 80\%.
21: The size of the beam at the target position was about 6 mm (rms).
22: The targets used were C and Cu with thicknesses of 40 and 5 mm, respectively.
23:
24:
25: Two photons from an $\eta$-meson were detected by an electromagnetic calorimeter
26: consisting of 206 pure CsI crystals with plastic veto counters.
27: The shape of the crystal is truncated-trapezoidal with a hexagonal cross
28: section and its thickness is 30 cm for 148 pieces (type-A) and 25 cm for
29: 58 pieces (type-B);
30: the performance of the type-B is described in detail in
31: Ref.~\cite{CsI}.
32: In the first series of the measurements,
33: they were assembled to 6 blocks and placed on three turn tables
34: to change detector positions as reported in Ref.~\cite{Yama2}.
35: In the second series, they were rearranged to 4 blocks placed
36: in such a way that
37: two forward blocks covered
38: angles $15^\circ<\theta<72^\circ$ with respect to the beam direction
39: and angles $-17^\circ< \phi< +17^{\circ}$ with respect to
40: the horizontal plane
41: and two backward blocks $95^{\circ} < \theta < 125^{\circ}$
42: and $ -12^\circ< \phi <
43: 12^\circ$ for both sides of the beam direction. The different arrangements of
44: crystals served to check the acceptance of the detection system.
45:
46:
47: All the data were collected
48: using a similar data acquisition system as reported in Ref.~\cite{Yorita}.
49: In the present work, the main trigger for the data acquisition
50: required at least one signal from the tagging counters and
51: two signals from the CsI detectors.
52: The maximum counting rate of a CsI detector was about 10~kHz
53: and that of a tagging counter was about 200~kHz.
54: The dead time of the data taking was about 8\%.
55: A time resolution for $e$-$\gamma$ coincidences
56: of 800~ps (FWHM) was achieved
57: and the chance coincidence ratio was about 3\%.
58:
59:
60: The $\eta$-mesons were identified via their two photon decay
61: with an invariant mass analysis.
62: In Fig.~\ref{invmass}, the invariant mass spectrum ($M_{\gamma\gamma}$) measured in the
63: present work is shown by the solid line.
64: Two prominent peaks corresponding to
65: $\pi^0$ and $\eta$ mesons are clearly seen
66: on the continuum background,
67: which is considered to originate mainly from multi $\pi^0$ events.
68: We simulated two $\pi^0$ production process
69: by the Monte Carlo simulation.
70: The result is shown by the dotted line in Fig.~\ref{invmass}.
71: The shape is well fitted with an exponential function,
72: exp($aM_{\gamma\gamma}^2+bM_{\gamma\gamma}$).
73: In order to deduce double differential cross sections,
74: $d^2\sigma/d\theta/dp$,
75: the invariant mass spectrum was constructed
76: for the polar angle from 0$^\circ$ to 110$^\circ$ by 10$^\circ$ steps
77: and for the momentum from 0 to 1100~MeV by 100~MeV steps.
78: The yield of $\eta$-mesons in each spectrum was deduced by
79: subtracting the background events in the $\eta$ mass region,
80: which were estimated
81: with the function
82: fitted to the continuum
83: for each bin of the incident photon energy and
84: the $\eta$-meson polar angle and momentum.
85: Absolute cross sections were deduced
86: by taking into the account the thickness of the targets,
87: tagging counter counts, a tagging efficiency,
88: a geometrical acceptance and
89: the branching ratio ($\eta\rightarrow\gamma\gamma$)~\cite{PDG}.
90: The tagging efficiency was measured with a total absorbing lead glass
91: detector positioned in the direct beam.
92: The geometrical acceptance of the detection system was calculated
93: by the Monte Carlo simulation
94: based on GEANT3~\cite{geant3}.
95: The systematic uncertainties of the overall normalization come from
96: photon flux (1\%),
97: background determination (5\%)
98: and the geometrical acceptance (5\%).
99: Consequently the overall systematic uncertainty is 7\%.
100:
101: