RawHits in Pixel/SCT Kohei Yorita The University of Chicago FTK Meeting on Feb. 21 st 2007.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Online Spacepoints in EC fixed After the fixes were applied, the IDScan inefficiency (with respect to EF) has decreased by 90%, ie. out of an example set.
Advertisements

Proposal for a new design of LumiCal R. Ingbir, P. Ruzicka, V. Vrba October 07 Malá Skála.
Collection Of Plots for A Testbeam Paper. List of Possible Plots R/Phi resolution, charge sharing, noise etc. Noise performance and few Landau distributions.
ATLAS SCT Endcap Detector Modules Lutz Feld University of Freiburg for the ATLAS SCT Collaboration Vertex m.
FTKSim Status: Ghost Busting part. II The Hit Warrior F. Crescioli, M. Dell'Orso, P. Gianetti G. Punzi, G. Volpi FTK Meeting 10/19/2006.
Electromagnetic shower in the AHCAL selection criteria data / MonteCarlo comparison of: handling linearity shower shapes CALICE collaboration meeting may.
Jan. 2009Jinyuan Wu & Tiehui Liu, Visualization of FTK & Tiny Triplet Finder Jinyuan Wu and Tiehui Liu Fermilab January 2010.
1Calice-UK Cambridge 9/9/05D.R. Ward David Ward Compare Feb’05 DESY data with Geant4 and Geant3 Monte Carlos. Work in progress – no definitive conclusions.
FTKSIM with rawhits Last week's updates October 9, 2007 Anton Kapliy.
1 Forward Tracking Simulation Norman A. Graf ALCPG Cornell July 15, 2003.
GLAST LAT Readout Electronics Marcus ZieglerIEEE SCIPP The Silicon Tracker Readout Electronics of the Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope Marcus.
GLAST LAT Readout Electronics Marcus ZieglerIEEE SCIPP The Silicon Tracker Readout Electronics of the Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope Marcus.
Progress on B-tagging Efficiency Monica Dunford May 22 nd, 2007.
Anne-Marie Magnan Imperial College London Kobe, May 11th, 2007 Calice meeting --- Anne-Marie Magnan 1 Status of MC reconstruction MC Reconstruction Chain.
Module Production for The ATLAS Silicon Tracker (SCT) The SCT requirements: Hermetic lightweight tracker. 4 space-points detection up to pseudo rapidity.
SCT Analyses on Cosmics. Efficiency 2 methods –Online- quick/biased -> located in SCT_Monitoring –Offline- slow/unbiased In agreement with each other.
Status of FTK simulation June 16,2005 G. Punzi, Pisa.
MC Study on B°  J/  ° With J/      °     Jianchun Wang Syracuse University BTeV meeting 03/04/01.
Simulation Tasks  Understanding Tracking  Understanding Hardware 1.Two types of tasks: a.Implementing known functions in ATLAS framework b.Understanding.
Since Rich wanted some relatively quick info on what detector might be needed to help MuTr pattern recognition, I did a scan on a central HIJING file I.
Monte Carlo Comparison of RPCs and Liquid Scintillator R. Ray 5/14/04  RPCs with 1-dimensional readout (generated by RR) and liquid scintillator with.
PHOBOS LRP: Should we fill the holes?! What happens to flow as the silicon gets blasted? J. Hamblen, S. Manly, I.C. Park.
Impact parameter resolution study for ILC detector Tomoaki Fujikawa (Tohoku university) ACFA Workshop in Taipei Nov
N. Saoulidou Fermilab 1 Status & Update of track reconstruction in the Near Detector N. Saoulidou, Fermilab
Fine Pixel CCD for ILC Vertex Detector ‘08 7/31 Y. Takubo (Tohoku U.) for ILC-FPCCD vertex group ILC vertex detector Fine Pixel CCD (FPCCD) Test-sample.
Simulation and Analysis of VTX03 and Upgrades to LASS Ryan Page.
Hit rate at high luminosity logical channels - ghosts – efficiency Toy Monte Carlo : # I have assumed a uniform particle distribution inside the TS # I.
AND/OR - Are MC and Data (in)consistent? - further analysis and new measurements to do - Effects on inefficiency evaluation 1 G. Martellotti 21/05/2015.
1 ATLAS SCT Endcap C Efficiency Measurement Nicholas Austin IoP Conference April 2009.
Pixel Offline Study Jianchun Wang Syracuse University 11/05/04, Pixel testbeam meeting.
1 Endcap C SCT Efficiency Calculation Update Nicholas Austin University of Liverpool Operations Meeting June 2007.
A Clustering Algorithm for LumiCal Halina Abramowicz, Ronen Ingbir, Sergey Kananov, Aharon Levy, Iftach Sadeh Tel Aviv University DESY Collaboration High.
Peter Kodyš, SCT Week Valencia, Juni 13, Charles University.
RPC Design Studies Gabriel Stoicea, NIPNE-HH, Bucharest CBM Software Week GSI-Darmstadt May 10, 2004.
Forward Pixel Beamtest Analysis Carsten Rott Purdue University Januar 24, 2001.
Test of the GEM Front Tracker for the SBS Spectrometer at Jefferson Lab F. Mammoliti, V. Bellini, M. Capogni, E. Cisbani, E. Jensen, P. Musico, F. Noto,
Digitization and hit reconstruction for Silicon Tracker in MarlinReco Sergey Shulga, Tatiana Ilicheva JINR, Dubna, Russia GSU, Gomel, Belarus LCWS07 30.
D. Jason Koskinen FNAL Collaboration mtg. 10/ Near Detector Efficiency.
Status of Reconstruction in sidloi3 Ron Cassell 5/20/10.
Rawhits Status A short update on only pattgen “sector mode” Kohei Yorita University of Chicago March 13 th FTK Meeting.
The Detector Performance Study for the Barrel Section of the ATLAS Semiconductor Tracker (SCT) with Cosmic Rays Yoshikazu Nagai (Univ. of Tsukuba) For.
FIRST RESULTS OF THE SILICON STRIP DETECTOR at STAR Jörg Reinnarth, Jonathan Bouchet, Lilian Martin, Jerome Baudot and the SSD teams in Nantes and Strasbourg.
CMS Upgrade Workshop - Fermilab Trigger Studies Using Stacked Pixel Layers Mark Pesaresi
1 Performance of a Magnetised Scintillating Detector for a Neutrino Factory Scoping Study Meeting U.C. Irvine Monday 21 st August 2006 M. Ellis & A. Bross.
Update on Diffractive Dijets Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham 12/07/2013.
9th October 2003Danny Hindson, Oxford University1 Inner Detector Silicon Alignment Simple approach -Align in stages + rely on iteration Barrel to Barrel.
Comparison of different chamber configurations for the high luminosity upgrade of M2R2 G. Martellotti - LNF - 13/03/2015 Roma1 + Alessia.
RD program on hybrids & Interconnects Background & motivation At sLHC the luminosity will increase by a factor 10 The physics requirement on the tracker.
Paul Rubinov on behalf of Gene Fisk, Kurt Krempetz 22 Aug 2012.
MICE Tracker Software A. Dobbs CM32 9 th Feb 2012.
Plots of RPC performance G. Cattani, University of Rome “Tor Vergata” & INFN Roma 2 on behalf of ATLAS Muon Collaboration.
Level 3 Tracking Tutorial R. Beuselinck 7 February 2001 Current status of level 3 tracking interface User access methods and parameter definitions Simple.
Noise results from SR1 combined SCT barrel tests Summary of some initial results Alan Barr, UCL Pepe Bernabeu, Valencia.
Pattern recognition with the triplet method Fabrizio Cei INFN & University of Pisa MEG Meeting, Hakata October /10/20131 Fabrizio Cei.
FP-CCD GLD VERTEX GROUP Presenting by Tadashi Nagamine Tohoku University ILC VTX Ringberg Castle, May 2006.
20 April 2007MICE Tracker Phone Meeting1 Analysis of cosmic/self-triggerd data of station 5 Hideyuki Sakamoto MICE Tracker Phone Meeting 20 th April 2007.
DESY BT analysis - updates - S. Uozumi Dec-12 th 2011 ScECAL meeting.
Ftksim at high luminosity Monthly meeting September 22, 2008 Anton Kapliy.
Tracking detectors/2 F.Riggi.
Alpine, very forward, EOS…
2018/6/15 The Fast Tracker Real Time Processor and Its Impact on the Muon Isolation, Tau & b-Jet Online Selections at ATLAS Francesco Crescioli1 1University.
Huagen Xu IKP: T. Randriamalala, J. Ritman and T. Stockmanns
FDIRC MC Studies: PMT Coupling Options
RIKEN VTX Software Meeting
Preliminary Study of 214Bi Background in 100Mo foils
DT Local Reconstruction on CRAFT data
Annovi, M. Beretta, P. Laurelli, G. Maccarrone, A. Sansoni
Monitoring SCT Efficiency and Noise
Contents First section: pion and proton misidentification probabilities as Loose or Tight Muons. Measurements using Jet-triggered data (from run).
Status of DT Local Trigger Commissioning
Presentation transcript:

RawHits in Pixel/SCT Kohei Yorita The University of Chicago FTK Meeting on Feb. 21 st 2007

2 Pixel Detector Drawing <- X-Y view of Pixel Each line corresponds to a module. Layer 1 : 22 Modules Layer 2 : 38 Modules Layer 3 : 52 Modules In each module, #Row increases as Black->Red->Green->Blue “counterclockwise” in phi. Z-X view of Pixel -> 13 Modules in Z : (EtaModule) In each module, #Column increases as Black->Red->Green->Blue->Yellow Less hits in high eta due to MC track generation (|eta|<1.0) Numbering looks consistent in all module. One module x y x z

3 More on Pixel module (just to be sure) Row# Column# yx phiz In Each module, index is Row (phi): (328) Column (z) : (144) Both Row & Column numbers are monotonically increasing ! 8 Row points (row#= ) look like dead channel (no hits.). Why ? Same plot but all modules in layer1

4 # of Entry : Strange spikes ? > Left (row): 0 entry (hole) in middle 8 points (#row: ). instead, 4x2 spikes (~double entry) before/after the gap. > Right (column) : 9 spikes (~ higher by 40%) -> These should be due to the gaps between FE chips that have to be fully covered in readout. #Row #Column 4 x 4

5 “Ganged” Pixel (Row) & “Longed” Pixel (Column) Row (phi) : Two-fold ambiguity remains. Column(z) : Continuous but 9 points give higher occupancy -> less resolution. column row 8chips In the region between different FE chips, Pixels are either - Longer(600um) for column (z) direction -> Total 9 edges that have x1.5 longer pixel. - Ganged for row (phi) direction. (8cells) -> 4points x each side (before/after gap).

6 SCT Detector Drawing <- X-Y view of SCT Each line corresponds to a module. Layer 1 : 32 Modules Layer 2 : 40 Modules Layer 3 : 48 Modules Layer 4 : 56 Modules In each module, #strip increases as Black->Red->Green->Blue->Yellow->.. “counterclockwise” in phi. 768 strip In r-phi plane, Each strip has same Z=Z(center) In stereo plane Each strip has different Z ~2.4mm (=tan(0.04)x60mm) z Black : r-phi Red : Stereo z (mm)

7 A Module in SCT (Layer1) Side 1 (r-phi)Side 0 (z) -> Strip Number (0-767) increases monotonically. -> Z-coordinate is different between side 1 and side 0 due to 40 mrad rotation. -> Even though two submodules are glued in one module, 6x6->6x12(z), those readouts are treated as if there is no physical gap. (the same readout) Strip# yx phiz Strip# yx phiz 768 strip 1 readout

8 But Be Careful !!! Side0/Side1 definition is different in different layers Radius (mm)OrientationSide=0Side=1 Layer1300Phi/uStereor-phi Layer2373Phi/vr-phiStereo Layer3447Phi/uStereor-phi Layer4520Phi/vr-phiStereo u(v) corresponds to +40mrad(-40mrad) stereo angle -> Have to be careful in coding (choice of side e.t.c.).

9 Comparisons between SP & RawHits Using ~100K single muon training data sample. -> In principle event by event comparison is possible. Pixel0hit1hit2hits>3hits SP~1%~87%~10%~2% Raw~1%~45%~40%~14% SCT0hit1hit2hits>3hits SP~2%~93%~4%~1% Raw~1% ~88%~10%

10 Picking up events with ==2hits/layer in Pixel SPRaw * Not in use In rawhits, two hits are always in the same module. -> In a module, most of them are adjacent in phi(60%) and eta(40%). Module Difference Module Difference Row/column Difference Row/column Difference

11 Picking up events with ==2hits/layer in SCT SP : ~70% of the events (with two hits) are in different modules. RawHits: two hits corresponds to r-phi and stereo side in one module. SPRaw * Not in use Module Difference Module Difference Side/Strip Difference Side/Strip Difference

12 What’s happening in cross points between side0 and side1 ? ….. i i i-1 i-2 i+2 i+1 i-N+1 i-N i+N i+N-1 12cm N = sin(40mrad)x768 = > So expect ~60 cross points between r-phi and stereo plane.

13 Finding “Sector” > Running pattgen with “sector mode”. > Track finding efficiency SPRawHits Pixel(111)62%11% Pixel(111) +SCT(0111) 47%0% Pixel(111) +SCT(0111) Only r-phi -7.6% Number of track found by pattgen : SP : 30284x1.814=54945 Raw : 6146x1.416= /54945=16% -> Next step is how to choose it. 104 sector survive Only 1 sector survive

14 What’s done so far & To do > Numbering & data quality check : almost done -> basically monotonous function but we need to be careful for handling of gaps (pixel) and side definition (SCT) > Modified codes for rawhit input : done Just to include flag “S” (rawhits). Now rawhits are readable for pattgen/corrgen/ftksim > Removed stereo hit in SCT (for now) : done > Should make criteria to choose layers (1D or 2D). > First Try : Random pick-up routine for each pixel layer if hits are nearby (easy-check), then averaging… > Generate constants > And more to follow (I need to know what can be done and can not be done... Still learning.