Mark Dorman – UCL/RAL – Calibration Workshop Talk Update on ND Strip-to-Strip Calibration Work Mark Dorman Calibration Workshop Fermilab, September 7-9.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Update on Data / MC Comparisons for Low Hadronic Energy CC-like Events Reminder of problem Fiducial studies with more MC statistics Effect of offset in.
Advertisements

CBM Calorimeter System CBM collaboration meeting, October 2008 I.Korolko(ITEP, Moscow)
Beam-plug and shielding studies related to HCAL and M2 Robert Paluch, Burkhard Schmidt November 25,
The performance of Strip-Fiber EM Calorimeter response uniformity, spatial resolution The 7th ACFA Workshop on Physics and Detector at Future Linear Collider.
N. Saoulidou Fermilab 1 Update on track reconstruction in the Near Detector N. Saoulidou, Fermilab
LHCb PatVeloTT Performance Adam Webber. Why Upgrade?  Currently we de-focus the beams o LHCb Luminosity ~ 2x10 32 cm -2 s -1 o ~ 1 interaction per bunch.
1 Calice Meeting 20/9/06David Ward What did we learn from DESY 2005 run? DESY run May CERN run August Data/MC comparisons for ECAL.
1 Study of the Tail Catcher Muon Tracker (TCMT) Scintillator Strips and Leakage with Simulated Coil Rick Salcido Northern Illinois University For CALICE.
Off-axis Simulations Peter Litchfield, Minnesota  What has been simulated?  Will the experiment work?  Can we choose a technology based on simulations?
1 N. Davidson E/p single hadron energy scale check with minimum bias events Jet Note 8 Meeting 15 th May 2007.
GLAST LAT ProjectIA Workshop 6 – Feb28,2006 Preliminary Studies on the dependence of Arrival Time distributions in the LAT using CAL Low Energy Trigger.
MINOS Feb Antineutrino running Pedro Ochoa Caltech.
1 PID Detectors & Emittance Resolution Chris Rogers Rutherford Appleton Laboratory MICE CM17.
Effects of Tracking Limitations On Jet Mass Resolution Chris Meyer UCSC ILC Simulation Reconstruction Meeting July 3, 2007.
CC/NC SEPARATION STUDY Andy Blake Cambridge University Friday February 23 rd 2007.
1 N. Davidson, E. Barberio E/p single hadron energy scale check with minimum bias event Hadronic Calibration Workshop 26 th -27 th April 2007.
1 N. Davidson Calibration with low energy single pions Tau Working Group Meeting 23 rd July 2007.
J. Estrada - Fermilab1 AFEII in the test cryostat at DAB J. Estrada, C. Garcia, B. Hoeneisen, P. Rubinov First VLPC spectrum with the TriP chip Z measurement.
MC Study on B°  J/  ° With J/      °     Jianchun Wang Syracuse University BTeV meeting 03/04/01.
CC ANALYSIS STUDIES Andy Blake Cambridge University Fermilab, September 2006.
The Time-of-Flight system of the PAMELA experiment: in-flight performances. Rita Carbone INFN and University of Napoli RICAP ’07, Rome,
SMRD April 2007 Status of the atmospheric muon studies Piotr Mijakowski OUTLINE: Primary muon spectrum at the sea level Primary muon.
Atmospheric Neutrino Oscillations in Soudan 2
Pion test beam from KEK: momentum studies Data provided by Toho group: 2512 beam tracks D. Duchesneau April 27 th 2011 Track  x Track  y Base track positions.
Energy Flow and Jet Calibration Mark Hodgkinson Artemis Meeting 27 September 2007 Contains work by R.Duxfield,P.Hodgson, M.Hodgkinson,D.Tovey.
The Number of Light Neutrino Families ● Physics motivation for measurement ● Direct / indirect searches for ● Analysis methodology for ● Single photon.
Beam test results of Tile/fiber EM calorimeter and Simulator construction status 2005/03/05 Detector Niigata University ONO Hiroaki contents.
Feb 10, 2005 S. Kahn -- Pid Detectors in G4MicePage 1 Pid Detector Implementation in G4Mice Steve Kahn Brookhaven National Lab 10 Feb 2005.
The Scintillator ECAL Beam Test at FNAL K. Kotera, Shinshu-u, 1st October 2009 CALICE Scintillator ECAL group; Kobe University, Kyungpook University, the.
Point Source Search with 2007 & 2008 data Claudio Bogazzi AWG videconference 03 / 09 / 2010.
N. Saoulidou Fermilab 1 Status & Update of track reconstruction in the Near Detector N. Saoulidou, Fermilab
1 Energy loss correction for a crystal calorimeter He Miao Institute of High Energy Physics Beijing, P.R.China.
CaloTopoCluster Based Energy Flow and the Local Hadron Calibration Mark Hodgkinson June 2009 Hadronic Calibration Workshop.
Detector Monte-Carlo ● Goal: Develop software tools to: – Model detector performance – Study background issues – Calculate event rates – Determine feasibility.
Simulations Report E. García, UIC. Run 1 Geometry Radiator (water) 1cm x 2cm x 2cm with optical properties Sensitive Volume (hit collector) acrylic (with.
© Imperial College LondonPage 1 Tracking & Ecal Positional/Angular Resolution Hakan Yilmaz.
First Look at Data and MC Comparisons for Cedar and Birch ● Comparisons of physics quantities for CC events with permutations of Cedar, Birch, Data and.
First look at non-Gaussian tails with the new Reconstruction Stathes Paganis Univ. of Sheffield LAr-H8 Working Group, 18-Oct-05.
Ciro Bigongiari, Salvatore Mangano Results of the optical properties of sea water with the OB system.
1 A first look at the KEK tracker data with G4MICE Malcolm Ellis 2 nd December 2005.
N. Saoulidou, Fermilab, MINOS Collaboration Meeting N. Saoulidou, Fermilab, ND/CC Parallel Session, MINOS Collaboration Meeting R1.18.
05/04/06Predrag Krstonosic - Cambridge True particle flow and performance of recent particle flow algorithms.
Cedar and pre-Daikon Validation ● CC PID parameter based CC sample selections with Birch, Cedar, Carrot and pre-Daikon. ● Cedar validation for use with.
Muon/Special Detector Studies Update St. Malo Muon ID - Single muons, single pion rejection. TESLA TDR (M. Piccolo) 2. Muon ID events:  ID efficiency,
Magnetized hadronic calorimeter and muon veto for the K +   +  experiment L. DiLella, May 25, 2004 Purpose:  Provide pion – muon separation (muon veto)
Beam Extrapolation Fit Peter Litchfield  An update on the method I described at the September meeting  Objective;  To fit all data, nc and cc combined,
MCS: Multiple Coulomb Scattering Sophie Middleton.
A bin-free Extended Maximum Likelihood Fit + Feldman-Cousins error analysis Peter Litchfield  A bin free Extended Maximum Likelihood method of fitting.
Mark Dorman UCL/RAL MINOS Collaboration Meeting Fermilab, Oct. 05 Data/MC Comparisons and Estimating the ND Flux with QE Events ● Update on QE event selection.
Calice Meeting Argonne Muon identification with the hadron calorimeter Nicola D’Ascenzo.
1 Light Yield results from the KEK tracker test using G4MICE M. Ellis Tracker Phone Meeting 25 th January 2006.
Calibration of the ZEUS calorimeter for hadrons and jets Alex Tapper Imperial College, London for the ZEUS Collaboration Workshop on Energy Calibration.
Muons at CalDet Introduction Track Finder Package ADC Corrections Drift Points Path Length Attenuation Strip-to-Strip Calibration Scintillator Response.
Update on Diffractive Dijets Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham 12/07/2013.
Status of QEL Analysis ● QEL-like Event Selection and Sample ● ND Flux Extraction ● Fitting for MINOS Collaboration Meeting FNAL, 7 th -10 th December.
Ciro Bigongiari, Salvatore Mangano, Results of the optical properties of sea water with the OB system.
Mark Dorman Separation Of Charged Current And Neutral Current Events In The MINOS Far Detector Using The Hough Transform Mark Dorman 16/12/04.
Energy Reconstruction in the CALICE Fe-AHCal in Analog and Digital Mode Fe-AHCal testbeam CERN 2007 Coralie Neubüser CALICE Collaboration meeting Argonne,
Extrapolation Techniques  Four different techniques have been used to extrapolate near detector data to the far detector to predict the neutrino energy.
Mark Dorman UCL/RAL MINOS ANL Meeting March 05 Dr. Quasi-Elastic (or... How I learned to stop worrying and love the Hough transform) Mark Dorman ● Update.
Mark Dorman UCL/RAL MINOS WITW June 05 An Update on Using QE Events to Estimate the Neutrino Flux and Some Preliminary Data/MC Comparisons for a QE Enriched.
SHIP calorimeters at test beam I. KorolkoFebruary 2016.
DESY BT analysis - updates - S. Uozumi Dec-12 th 2011 ScECAL meeting.
Brunel University London Field-off LiH Energy Loss Rhys Gardener CM45 – July 28th.
Searches for double partons
GLAST Large Area Telescope:
Chris Smith California Institute of Technology EPS Conference 2003
Far Detector Performance and Calibration
Rick Salcido Northern Illinois University For CALICE Collaboration
Rick Salcido Northern Illinois University For CALICE Collaboration
Presentation transcript:

Mark Dorman – UCL/RAL – Calibration Workshop Talk Update on ND Strip-to-Strip Calibration Work Mark Dorman Calibration Workshop Fermilab, September 7-9

Mark Dorman – UCL/RAL – Calibration Workshop Talk Introduction and Motivation My work thus far has involved looking at the ND s2s constants as they exist at the moment and understanding the various corrections that need to be incorporated to produce them. I decided to try to perform my own quick and dirty s2s calibration as a way to get to grips with the corrections before trying to leverage the work done by Phil. So far I have generated my own constants taking into account the following: I have not yet implemented a 0 or 1 pe correction. I have been working with pME beam MC. The aim of this talk is to quantify how well my constants agree with MC truth as I fold in more of these corrections and then, given the level of this agreement, to look at the constants I produce for real beam data. event and muon track hit pre-selection truncation of strip-end SigLin distributions to remove Landau tail effects attenuation correction (from Calibrator) basic path length through scintillator correction

Mark Dorman – UCL/RAL – Calibration Workshop Talk Event and Hit Pre-Selection I have been working with 2 samples – all muon track hits and a rock muon-like track hit sample. My pre-selection criteria are as follows: Shared criteria: All muon track hits: Rock muon-like sample: event has only 1 track track has at least 10 track-like planes difference between track start in U and V views less than 11 planes difference between track end in U and V views less than 6 planes hit path length through scintillator is less than 1.3 cm hit is inside the detector track is at least 20 planes long track begins in first 4 planes event has no showers track is at least 40 planes long if 0 < reco_eshw < 10 GeV remove the first 20 planes from consideration if 10 < reco_eshw < 20 GeV remove the first 30 planes from consideration shower energy less than 20 GeV

Mark Dorman – UCL/RAL – Calibration Workshop Talk Event and Hit Pre-Selection The following figures show the effects of the pre-selection criteria on the ‘all hits’ sample: Pre-selection criteria remove about half the hits and the veto region is much more sparsely populated where showers have been removed. The ‘4’ profiles correspond to the 4 plane coverages. The strip-end mean responses are shifted down and the RMS gets lower.

Mark Dorman – UCL/RAL – Calibration Workshop Talk Event and Hit Pre-Selection And for the rock muon-like sample: The following pages will always refer to the ‘all hits’ sample due to its larger statistics. Pre-selection criteria remove the vast majority of hits leaving the highest densities in the first planes. Again the strip-end mean responses are shifted down and the RMS gets lower.

Mark Dorman – UCL/RAL – Calibration Workshop Talk Attenuation Correction Hits that make it through the pre-selection are corrected for attenuation of the signal along the optical fibres. I am using the mapper data via the Calibrator GetAttenCorrectedTpos() function where the ‘lpos’ argument is taken as the ‘trk.stpu’ value if the hit is in a V plane and vice versa. As such I am just correcting by the same amount as was initially used when the MC was generated (although reconstruction errors can change this): A pictorial representation of the attenuation correction as it exists in the MC for the partially instrumented V planes.

Mark Dorman – UCL/RAL – Calibration Workshop Talk Path Length Correction Hits are then corrected for the path length through scintillator. My correction is basic: For the 1 st track hit I calculate the angle subtended by a line joining it to the 2 nd hit with the z-axis (in 3D). For the 2 nd to penultimate hits I calculate the angle subtended by a line joining the hits directly before and after the hit in question with the z-axis. For the last hit on the track I use the angle subtended by a line joining the penultimate hit to the last hit and the z-axis. Geometry then gives 1.0 (cm) / cosθ z as the path length through scintillator and hence I just use cosθ z as the correction factor. Path lengths are mostly close to 1.0 as expected for beam MC. I have only used hits with a path length less than 1.3 cm.

Mark Dorman – UCL/RAL – Calibration Workshop Talk Path Length Correction The following plot shows the path length correction in action: The path length correction does a good job of flattening the response up to about 1.3 cm - this is where I have placed a hit pre-selection cut.

Mark Dorman – UCL/RAL – Calibration Workshop Talk Deriving the Constants I then use the mean of the mean corrected responses per strip-end to define the value to which all strips will be calibrated. I have employed this methodology to the ‘all track’ and ‘rock muon-like’ samples for all strips in the ND and just in the calorimeter strips (i.e. plane < 121). The following plots show the relative errors in my calculated constants compared to the MC truth for a variety of samples and the colour scheme is as follows: Black – no cuts or corrections Red – pre-selection cuts Blue – pre-selection cuts and path length corrected Pink – pre-selection cuts and attenuation corrected Cyan – all cuts and corrections

Mark Dorman – UCL/RAL – Calibration Workshop Talk Accuracy of the Constants All muon track hits sample for all ND planes using corrected SigLin means. All muon track hits sample for all ND planes using corrected SigLin truncated means. Mean – RMS – Mean – RMS –

Mark Dorman – UCL/RAL – Calibration Workshop Talk Accuracy of the Constants All muon track hits sample for calorimeter planes using corrected SigLin means. All muon track hits sample for calorimeter planes using corrected SigLin truncated means. Mean – RMS – Mean – RMS –

Mark Dorman – UCL/RAL – Calibration Workshop Talk Accuracy of the Constants It can be seen that the attenuation correction is doing most of the work (as expected) with the pre-selection helping to shift the average responses down towards the truth responses. It can also be seen that truncation of the strip-end response histograms is very useful for reducing the RMS of the errors in the derived constants. I wanted to have some way to quantify how well the corrections and cuts were doing and decided to implement Jeff’s idea of seeing what percentage of strips were more than 2% and 5% wrong. The following slide shows tables of the means and RMS of the error histograms together with these new quantities.

Mark Dorman – UCL/RAL – Calibration Workshop Talk Cuts Applied MeanRMS % of constants >2% wrong % of constants >5% wrong None Pre-Select -ion (PS) PS + Path Length PS + Atten -uation All Cuts Applied MeanRMS % of constants >2% wrong % of constants >5% wrong None Pre-Select -ion (PS) PS + Path Length PS + Atten -uation All Errors in Constants (from means) for Calorimeter Errors in Constants (from truncated means) for Calorimeter

Mark Dorman – UCL/RAL – Calibration Workshop Talk Expected Statistical Error For a typical strip-end in the calorimeter planes: And so the expected error due to statistics is: And so by considering a 3σ deviation (expect ~99% within this) I would expect about 0.4% of strips to be outside 2% wrong due to statistical error. This is clearly not enough to account for the values in the tables on the previous slide. (RMS / mean) ≈ (200 / 630) ≈ 32% # hits in strip ≈ 1700 (32 / /2 ) ≈ 0.8%