1. We are now working with 2 microscope: 1st Microscope Official setup: MICOS stage NIkON optics and illuminator DALSA camera cad-4 Recently several hardware problems with this setup: fault counting on stage encoders: compromised repeatability of measurements (Now fixed) motion instability of the stage (5-20 micron) (Unresolved) Image quality of camera seriously degraded (Unresolved)

2. 2nd Microscope Prototype setup: MICOS stage ZEISS optics (40X) and fiber optic illumination Custom CMOS camera interfaced to Genesis (Thanks to Salerno group for the Genesis boards) Microscope used mainly for test (see Gabriele talk) fine tuning not yet concluded Not ready for the ACQ

3. 8 emulsions sheets after 1.6 cm of Lead (from 25 to 32) 7 angles Tracks density: 5-7 /mm 2 (pions and muons) 1.1 X 1.1 cm 2 scanned surface on each emulsion sheet Due to HD problems results are relative to Dec presentation in Salerno

4. Top : 352 microtracks/view Bottom : 302 microtracks/view Top microtracks in fiducial marks coordinates

5. Vertigo Scan Configuration : 20 Layers over 44 microns Focus lock on center level (2-3 levels are empty)

6. Base tracks are uniformly distributed in the scanned area: 253 tracks/mm 2 /|θ|<0.6 rad

7. How we select the signal: Rectangular cut |θ x | < 0.72 && | θy+0.007|< 0.015 Gaussian fits over a flat background each peak is selected inside 3σ Total signal = 2269 Background = 142

8. Signal : 27 tracks/mm 2

9. Outside the beam angular region signal

10. We performed alignment and tracking with FEDRA and AlphaOmega, the results are comparable. 415 tracks with 8 segments are reconstructed = (84±2)% overall

11. Thanks to Napoli and Salerno Labs, we measured the plate #29: 1cm 2 measured twice @ Napoli: signal tracks inside 3σ (NA-1 e NA-2) 1cm 2 measured twice @ Salerno: signal tracks inside 3σ (SA-1 e SA-2) NA-1 SA-2 SA-1 NA-2 Cnapoli Csalerno Tracks measured twice @ Napoli OR twice @ Salerno Cnapoli Csalerno Referene Tracks

12. 256 230 296 326 310 238 223 74% of prediction tracks has been measured in Bologna

13. Our guess: part of inefficiency is due to a non exhaustive trigger list. We continue to use a MC approach to improve this point. Data and MC tracks are not directly comparable: MC is used as an external tool to validate the method. An additional code has been written to find out the best trigger list. An interface to use Tracking has been written

14. (fd = 2.2) focal depth in m (dens = 30.) grain density in grains/100 m (fog = 5.) fog density in grains/1000 m 3 (et = 44.) emulsion nominal thickness in m (srink = 1.1) srinkage (nl = 20) number of levels (etdaq = 44) emulsion thickness (DAQ parameter) (sigsm = 0.06) radial smearing of grains in m (surfsm = 0.8) focusing smearing in m (ccdsm = 0.3) CCD readout resolution in m (aview = 240.) view side in um Parameters used in the simulation Fog Track Grains

15. Track generation (Fluka, Geant 4) Grain generationFog grain generation ACQ simulation: Levels & Clusters Output microtracks

16. Set of Validated Real tracks Trial Trigger list Trigger Optimization code Best Trigger list Complete set of MC tracks Trigger Optimization code Best Trigger list Grain Generation code =0.98 =0.95

17. The comprehension of the efficiency problem is still incomplete. In particular: At the level of the microtrack; At the level of microtrack linking. Work in progress on the background evaluation. Preliminary results are encouraging.