1 N. Davidson Calibration with low energy single pions Tau Working Group Meeting 23 rd July 2007.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Tracey Berry1 Looking into e &  for high energy e/  Dr Tracey Berry Royal Holloway.
Advertisements

INTRODUCTION TO e/ ɣ IN ATLAS In order to acquire the full physics potential of the LHC, the ATLAS electromagnetic calorimeter must be able to identify.
07/16/2002 p. 1 Muon Fake RatesPetra Merkel Muon Fake Rates Concept: determine rate of fake muons due to pion/kaon punch-through (PT) muons out of pion/kaon.
Implementation of e-ID based on BDT in Athena EgammaRec Hai-Jun Yang University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (with T. Dai, X. Li, A. Wilson, B. Zhou) US-ATLAS.
Missing E T Reconstruction in the ATLAS Calorimeter Calor 2006, Chicago June 5th - 9th, 2006 For the ATLAS Jet/E T Miss Group Ambreesh Gupta, University.
Jet and Jet Shapes in CMS
1 physics reaction of interest (parton level) lost soft tracks due to magnetic field added tracks from in-time (same trigger) pile-up event added tracks.
1 N. Davidson E/p single hadron energy scale check with minimum bias events Jet Note 8 Meeting 15 th May 2007.
Validation of DC3 fully simulated W→eν samples (NLO, reconstructed in ) Laura Gilbert 01/08/06.
CSC Note Jet 8 Meeting – April 11 '07 Status and plan for single hadron scale check with minimum bias events N. Davidson The University of Melbourne.
 Track-First E-flow Algorithm  Analog vs. Digital Energy Resolution for Neutral Hadrons  Towards Track/Cal hit matching  Photon Finding  Plans E-flow.
1 N. Davidson E/p minimum bias update with Athena Analysis Meeting 12 th June 2007.
1 Hadronic In-Situ Calibration of the ATLAS Detector N. Davidson The University of Melbourne.
1 N. Davidson E/p minimum bias update with Athena Jet Note 8 Meeting 7 th June 2007.
1 Andrea Bangert, ATLAS SCT Meeting, Monte Carlo Studies Of Top Quark Pair Production Andrea Bangert, Max Planck Institute of Physics, CSC T6.
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.
Analysis Meeting – April 17 '07 Status and plan update for single hadron scale check with minimum bias events N. Davidson.
In order to acquire the full physics potential of the LHC, the ATLAS electromagnetic calorimeter must be able to efficiently identify photons and electrons.
My work PAST WORKS: 1) (Madrid) Data Analysis in L3, LEP: - Measurement of the Mass, Width and Cross Section of the W boson production at LEP, Study.
Status of calorimeter simulations Mikhail Prokudin, ITEP.
CATphysics meeting, 14/11/2008D. Froidevaux Introduction and news + New fellows since end of September: W. Fedorko (ADT), M. Jimenez (ADE), D. Kollar (ADP),
Progress with the Development of Energy Flow Algorithms at Argonne José Repond for Steve Kuhlmann and Steve Magill Argonne National Laboratory Linear Collider.
Energy Flow and Jet Calibration Mark Hodgkinson Artemis Meeting 27 September 2007 Contains work by R.Duxfield,P.Hodgson, M.Hodgkinson,D.Tovey.
Preliminary comparison of ATLAS Combined test-beam data with G4: pions in calorimetric system Andrea Dotti, Per Johansson Physics Validation of LHC Simulation.
Energy Flow Technique and *where I am Lily Have been looking at the technique developed by Mark Hodgkinson, Rob Duxfield of Sheffield. Here is a summary.
Optimizing DHCAL single particle energy resolution Lei Xia Argonne National Laboratory 1 LCWS 2013, Tokyo, Japan November , 2013.
Optimizing DHCAL single particle energy resolution Lei Xia 1 CALICE Meeting LAPP, Annecy, France September 9 – 11, 2013.
DHCAL - Resolution (S)DHCAL Meeting January 15, 2014 Lyon, France Burak Bilki, José Repond and Lei Xia Argonne National Laboratory.
C.ClémentTile commissioning meeting – From susy group talk of last Wednesday  Simulation and digitization is done in version (8) 
NA48-2 new results on Charged Semileptonic decays Anne Dabrowski Northwestern University Kaon 2005 Workshop 14 June 2005.
August 30, 2006 CAT physics meeting Calibration of b-tagging at Tevatron 1. A Secondary Vertex Tagger 2. Primary and secondary vertex reconstruction 3.
Event Reconstruction in SiD02 with a Dual Readout Calorimeter Detector Geometry EM Calibration Cerenkov/Scintillator Correction Jet Reconstruction Performance.
Event-Specific Hadronic Event Reconstruction 1 Graham W. Wilson, University of Kansas.
Development of a Particle Flow Algorithms (PFA) at Argonne Presented by Lei Xia ANL - HEP.
CaloTopoCluster Based Energy Flow and the Local Hadron Calibration Mark Hodgkinson June 2009 Hadronic Calibration Workshop.
Study of Standard Model Backgrounds for SUSY search with ATLAS detector Takayuki Sasaki, University of Tokyo.
Results from particle beam tests of the ATLAS liquid argon endcap calorimeters Beam test setup Signal reconstruction Response to electrons  Electromagnetic.
PFAs – A Critical Look Where Does (my) SiD PFA go Wrong? S. R. Magill ANL ALCPG 10/04/07.
CALOR April Algorithms for the DØ Calorimeter Sophie Trincaz-Duvoid LPNHE – PARIS VI for the DØ collaboration  Calorimeter short description.
29,30 July 2010 India CMS Meeting,BARC Mumbai 1 Update on Z’-> τ τ->τ jet+ τ jet analysis Nitish Dhingra(P.U.,India) Kajari Mazumdar(TIFR,India) Jasbir.
Fast Simulation and the Higgs: Parameterisations of photon reconstruction efficiency in H  events Fast Simulation and the Higgs: Parameterisations of.
Search for High-Mass Resonances in e + e - Jia Liu Madelyne Greene, Lana Muniz, Jane Nachtman Goal for the summer Searching for new particle Z’ --- a massive.
Issues with cluster calibration + selection cuts for TrigEgamma note Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham Birmingham ATLAS Weekly Meeting 12/08/2010.
Hggs-D meeting MPI 11/20061 Higgs Physics – Activities in Bonn/Siegen Jörn Große-Knetter ATLAS-Higgs-D Treffen München,
A search for the ZZ signal in the 3 lepton channel Azeddine Kasmi Robert Kehoe Southern Methodist University Thanks to: H. Ma, M. Aharrouche.
1 S, Fedele, Student Presentations, 2004/08/04S Amazing Title Slide Reworking the CES Cluster Reconstruction Algorithm By: Steve Fedele Advisor: Pavel.
Update on Diffractive Dijets Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham 12/07/2013.
Trigger study on photon slice Yuan Li Feb 27 th, 2009 LPNHE ATLAS group meeting.
Dijet Mass and Calibration1 H C A L Z(700) Data and Calibration Dan Green Fermilab June, 2001.
10 January 2008Neil Collins - University of Birmingham 1 Tau Trigger Performance Neil Collins ATLAS UK Physics Meeting Thursday 10 th January 2008.
John Marshall, 1 John Marshall, University of Cambridge LCD-WG2, July
Electron Identification Efficiency from Z→ee Maria Fiascaris University of Oxford In collaboration with Tony Weidberg and Lucia di Ciaccio ATLAS UK SM.
Cut flow for A/H  tau tau  lh. Overview We present an overview of the cuts used for the neutral MSSM A/H  tau tau  lh analysis for 1 fb -1 The statistical.
Atautau  lh Carlos Solans TileCal Valencia meeting 20th September 2007.
1 D *+ production Alexandr Kozlinskiy Thomas Bauer Vanya Belyaev
 reconstruction and identification in CMS A.Nikitenko, Imperial College. LHC Days in Split 1.
Photon purity measurement on JF17 Di jet sample using Direct photon working Group ntuple Z.Liang (Academia Sinica,TaiWan) 6/24/20161.
Τ HLTrigger Optimization Mike B 6 th Nov. 2 M. Bachtis - UW The tau High Level Trigger scheme in CMS For the events that pass the L1 Trigger jet reconstruction.
RD. Schaffer, L. Iconomidou Fayard, D. Fournier
Some introduction Cosmics events can produce energetic jets and missing energy. They need to be discriminated from collision events with true MET and jets.
Jet Energy Scale and Calibration Framework
on behalf of ATLAS LAr Endcap Group
Effect of t42 algorithm on jets
Short Overview on calibration
Converted photons efficiency
May 2006 Hadronic Calibration Workshop Jet Session at Munich
Individual Particle Reconstruction
PDF Uncertainties on W+Jets
Plans for checking hadronic energy
Contents First section: pion and proton misidentification probabilities as Loose or Tight Muons. Measurements using Jet-triggered data (from run).
Presentation transcript:

1 N. Davidson Calibration with low energy single pions Tau Working Group Meeting 23 rd July 2007

2 Introduction The calorimetrs response to single hadrons will need to be measured in-situ. This can be done with the E/p method. This method has a lot in common with the tracking based hadronic tau reconstruction: Finding isolated pions, dealing with cluster overlap from neutrals etc. From September I hope to begin work on tau1p3p algorithm. Recall: E/p is a method to check the energy scale calibration. Minimum bias events have been studied to find isolated pions and check the low energy (Pt < 15GeV) range of the single hadron calibration. P – taken from track momentum (precise) E – taken as the sum of caloTopoClusters energies within a cone of ΔR=0.4 centered on the track position when extrapolated to the 2nd layer of the EM calorimeter. Only tracks with matching cluster within ΔR<0.05 are considered Only clusters with |eta| < 2.5 are used.

3 E/p method Previous work was done with csc datasets reconstructed with Athena Now looking at MC 400k minbias events: trig1_misal1_csc pythia_minbias.recon.v k single pions with et=1GeV trig1_misal1_mc singlepart_singlepi_et1.recon.v k single pions with et=10GeV trig1_misal1_mc singlepart_singlepi_et10.recon.v Many sample have 1mm problem and will be compared to 30 micron datasets when available.

4 Tracks in minimum bias for 11 vs 12 Different default track rec. in Athena 12 less tracks in 12 tracks of better quality when matched to a truth pion (less fake tracks?)

5 Clusters: 11 vs 12 CaloCalTopoClusters calibrated to local hadronic scale (but no dead material or out of cluster corrections). Previous calibration was to EM scale only Result: Larger E/p. but not centred on 1 yet. Increase in RMS

6 Selection of isolated pions (et=1GeV) Cuts made to find isolated pions in athena 11 data: Based on tracks: Number of tracks in event < 15 ΔR track isolation >0.8 >=1 B Layer Hit (to remove electron tracks from conversions) Based on clusters Cluster Multiplicity < 4 Energy difference in cones ΔR=1.0 and Δ R=0.4 < 200MeV Energy fraction in cone ΔR=0.2 > 0.7xEnergy in cone ΔR=0.4 Approx. 1 track in 200 survive. (or 1 per 10 events) For version 12: Can make harder cuts since there are x10 more statistics Changes: Removed cut on number of tracks as this was ineffectual ΔR track isolation >1.0 magnitude of energy difference in cones ΔR=1.0 and Δ R=0.4 < 100MeV Approx. same order of tracks survive

7 Results for et=1GeV pions An improvement to the E/p bias can be made by requiring all the energy to be within R< 0.2 This is equivalent to an isolated 0.2 cone E/p mean within 0.01 but RMS still larger For Cone 0.2: Sample E/p mean RMS -minimum bias (0.2) -single pion cone 0.4 -single pion cone 0.2 Error: ±0.007 Sample E/p mean RMS -minimum bias -single pion (after cuts) -single pion (before cuts) Error: ±0.007

8 Pions with et=10GeV First look at higher energy tail of minimum bias events. Pt=8-12 GeV pions in minimum bias were compared to Pt=10 GeV single pion sample For minimum bias approx 1/100 events have a track with 8GeV<pt<12GeV ¾ have matching topoCluster within R < 0.05 ¾ with matching 0.4 Cone Jet within R < 0.2 Single Pion sample with pt=10GeV Sum of topoClusters within R<0.4 Cone0.4TowerJet

9 Pt=10GeV pions in minimum bias However higher Pt tracks have large correlated contamination when compared with the 1GeV case: out of 400k events: 450 tracks remain with track isolation > tracks with no truth neutral or track within 0.4 Conclusion: Not many isolated pions in minimum bias for this energy A method to measure the neutral contamination is required. see later.

10 Pile-up First look at pile-up sample 5.6 minimum bias events piled up. sample of 1000 studied. Contamination much larger – Not suprising. No tracks (out of 1000 events) pass cuts defined previously. Method of cuts to find isolated pion probably not possible. Especially for pile-up with 20 events! Will need to use some kind of background subtraction.

11 First look at contamination subtraction Method to estimate background energy in the EM calorimeter: Identify pions which shower late depositing minimal energy in the EM Calorimeter. EM calo energy in R<0.05 around track is between MeV Energy in cone 0.1 in Hadronic Calorimeter > 0.6 x Track P

12 Estimate of contaminating energy Take the EM energy contamination as the energy difference between a cone of 0.4 and For 1GeV pions there will be an overestimate of the contam. due to pion EM energy outside R<0.05 For 10GeV pions this appears to be less than Plot shows such an estimate for pt=1GeV. Late showering pions in minimum bias selected as described on the pervious slide. Plus cuts on Track Isolation > 0.4 and at least one hit in the B layer

13 Estimate of contaminating energy (cont.) Estimate the contaminating energy density in the 0.05 cone as the same density as that is R<0.1 - R<0.05. More cuts may be needed to reduce the background until this approximation is valid. plot shows the difference in E/p between the single sample and minimum bias per unit of Delta R. In this example an estimate for the 0.05 cone would be incorrect by approx. (12-8)* = 0.01

14 EM Calo. energy subtraction results Result of subtracting the measured background energies: Only statistical error shown here. Differences may be explained by the reasons outlined before: - Overestimate of contam outside 0.05 cone due to pion energy - Underestimate of contam inside 0.05 More study required but looks interesting for very peliminary work. For 30k minimum bias events

15 Background in hadronic calorimeter Also need to estimate the contamination in the hadronic calorimeter: This can be measured in the area between R<0.4 and R<0.2 from the track as very little of the pions energy is deposited here on average. Below R< 0.2 contam. should be small (approx 0.02, but still needs to be accounted for. More investigation is required into this. In general more work will be done to see if this method can be used for pions where the cuts method can not be used.

16 Conclusions We can get a resonable measurement of the E/p for Et=1GeV pions based on cuts to find isolated pions in minimum bias events. This method will be difficult to use for pile-up and pions of more than a few GeV where isolated pions can not be found. Background estimation and subtraction is being examined to find the E/p in these cases. Should be studied in more detail with a range of datasets including pile- up and various jet reconstruction algorithms. Plan to also look at dijet samples as these contain a lot of tracks in the low energy range (pt<15GeV).