A text summary of each talk is given below.  The transparencies can be
found at:
<br><a href="./silvia/"> Silvia's </a>
<br><a href="./pam/"> Pam's </a>
<br><a href="./salavat/"> Salavat's </a>



<plaintext>



   Minutes of the Oct 25, 2000 Jet/Met meeting
   -------------------------------------------

Attendence: Sarah Eno, Sridhara Dasu, Pam Chumney, Salavat Abdullin,
Sasha Nikitenko, Dan Green, Silvia Arcelli, Hans Wenzel

                        Agenda
                        ------
                Discussion of Nov 9 L1 jet/met mini-review

This meeting was our first using VRVS, and was a total disaster.  For
some reason, Italy could hear us, but could not speak to us. The
chat window turned out to be a way that Italy could communicate
with us.  You type in a strip at the bottom of that screen that has
messages like "so-and-so joined"  "so-and-so left".  But, obviously
no where near optimal.  The CERN room 40-s2-01 was a complete disaster.
The problem is that the computer that controls VRVS is in a separate
room, and anybody who has dealt with VRVS knows you need easy access
to the computer.  They also had problems transmitting sound in the 
beginning, but eventually got it fixed (after about 1/2 hour).  It would
be good to get some CERN person to be an expert with this, who can
come to meetings and help people out.  Also, we need to make sure all
talks are posted from the web *before* the meeting.  You can not really
use the camera to transmit your talk with VRVS.  People need to be
able to access your talk from the web.  Hopefully, next meeting will go
better.

Most of the meeting was a free-form discussion.  One interesting thing that
we learned as a result of the discussion was that the geometry for the HF
in CMSIM is *not* what the hardware guys intend to built.  The CMSIM
version as 12 readout segments in eta, the "real" HF will have 16.

We discussed whether or not the current segmentation of the HF is optimal.
The main question is:  is there a high rate of fake jets in the HF,
and if so, is this because of the current segmentation or
because of our strange "raw" calibration, or because of unoptimzed
trigger tower thresholds?  Our current state of knowledge on the answers to 
these questions are available on a special web page, 
http://home.fnal.gov/~sceno/jpg/9nov2000/9nov00.html.

Sasha is working on understanding the L1 trigger efficiency for various
signals.  Andrei is working on optimizing the trigger thresholds
as a function of rapidity, and on deriving algorithms to supress fake
jets, Silvia is working on understanding the jet resolution versus
eta and on the fake rate versus eta, pam is preparing the L1 TDR,
Salavat is working on understanding how the L1 calibrations affect
L1 MET and Sarah will try to do a study on fake rates in various segmentation
schemes (similar to studies andrei has done in the past, and that
are available on the web page).