ATLAS ATLAS Week: 25/Feb to 1/Mar 2002 B-Physics Trigger Working Group Status Report

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ATLAS ATLAS PESA Meeting 25/04/02 B-Trigger Working Group Status Report This talk:
Advertisements

ATLAS PESA Meeting 20/11/02 1 B-Physics Trigger in the TDR Demonstrate viable & affordable B-physics trigger based on the evaluation of two strategies:
ATLAS ATLAS PESA Meeting 25/04/02 B-Trigger Working Group Work-plan This talk:
TDAQ week Lisbon, October B-Physics Trigger Status Contents: Introduction: Di-muon triggers Hadronic Final States Muon-electron Final States Program.
ATLAS ATLAS PESA Meeting 20/11/02 B-Trigger Working Group Work-plan This talk:
ATLAS PESA Meeting 20/11/02 1 To do: di-muon & full-scan triggers 1) Di-muon trigger at L=2x10 ^33, introducing full scan at lower luminosity To do: Update.
L2 chains for single-beam menu Muon full reconstruction T2Calo starting from MBTS Ricardo Gonçalo, Denis Damazio.
Sander Klous on behalf of the ATLAS Collaboration Real-Time May /5/20101.
Inefficiencies in the feet region 40 GeV muons selection efficiency   Barrel – End Cap transition 10th International Conference on Advanced Technology.
TDAQ week Lisbon, October HLT Algorithms Planning Discussion Discussion: (suggested timing) Aims for this meeting (2 mins) Milestones (1 min) Review.
B-physics with the initial ATLAS detector Aleandro Nisati for the ATLAS Collaboration INFN Commissione Scientifica I February 3rd, 4th 2003.
A Fast Level 2 Tracking Algorithm for the ATLAS Detector Mark Sutton University College London 7 th October 2005.
CMS High Level Trigger Selection Giuseppe Bagliesi INFN-Pisa On behalf of the CMS collaboration EPS-HEP 2003 Aachen, Germany.
Workhop on Recent Developments in High Energy Physics and Cosmology, Athens, April 2003 Th. Lagouri, A.U.Th. B-physics with the Atlas detector Theodota.
Aras Papadelis, Lund University 8 th Nordic LHC Physics Workshop Nov , Lund 1 The ATLAS B-trigger - exploring a new strategy for J/  (ee) ●
1  trigger optimization in CMS Tracker Giuseppe Bagliesi On behalf of  tracking group Workshop on B/tau Physics at LHC Helsinki, May 30 - June 1, 2002.
The ATLAS High Level Trigger Steering Journée de réflexion – Sept. 14 th 2007 Till Eifert DPNC – ATLAS group.
The ATLAS B physics trigger
Prospects for Studying Heavy Quarkonia with ATLAS at the LHC Prospects for Studying Heavy Quarkonia with ATLAS at the LHC Armin NAIRZ CERN on behalf of.
Stefania.Spagnolo, Dip. Fisica, Univ. Lecce CERN, Nov. 2006, ATLAS Trigger and Physics week Muon Event Filter Stefania Spagnolo Dip. Fisica, Univ. Lecce.
Sept 30 th 2004Iacopo Vivarelli – INFN Pisa FTK meeting Z  bb measurement in ATLAS Iacopo Vivarelli, Alberto Annovi Scuola Normale Superiore,University.
BEAUTY 2006, 28/09/06Julie Kirk1 B-triggers at ATLAS & CMS Julie Kirk Rutherford Appleton Laboratory On behalf of ATLAS and CMS.
Top Trigger Strategy in ATLASWorkshop on Top Physics, 18 Oct Patrick Ryan, MSU Top Trigger Strategy in ATLAS Workshop on Top Physics Grenoble.
The ATLAS trigger Ricardo Gonçalo Royal Holloway University of London.
Update on H  studies Catalin and Tony FTK meeting, July 13, 2006.
General Trigger Philosophy The definition of ROI’s is what allows, by transferring a moderate amount of information, to concentrate on improvements in.
Tracking at the ATLAS LVL2 Trigger Athens – HEP2003 Nikos Konstantinidis University College London.
Algorithm / Data-flow Interface
Overview of the High-Level Trigger Electron and Photon Selection for the ATLAS Experiment at the LHC Ricardo Gonçalo, Royal Holloway University of London.
1 Modelling parameters Jos Vermeulen, 2 June 1999.
The ATLAS B-physics Trigger Simon George Royal Holloway, University of London, UK On behalf of the ATLAS T/DAQ group 9th International Conference on B-Physics.
Faster tracking in hadron collider experiments  The problem  The solution  Conclusions Hans Drevermann (CERN) Nikos Konstantinidis ( Santa Cruz)
Copyright © 2000 OPNET Technologies, Inc. Title – 1 Distributed Trigger System for the LHC experiments Krzysztof Korcyl ATLAS experiment laboratory H.
The Region of Interest Strategy for the ATLAS Second Level Trigger
MOORE MOORE (Muon Object Oriented REconstruction) Track reconstruction in the Muon Spectrometer MuonIdentification MuonIdentification Reconstruction and.
1 John Baines Commissioning of the ATLAS High Level Trigger.
Trigger Requirements first thoughts from Alessandro Di Mattia, Giovanni Siragusa, Sergio Grancagnolo, Andrea Ventura, Michela Biglietti, Diana Scannicchio.
HEP 2005 WorkShop, Thessaloniki April, 21 st – 24 th 2005 Efstathios (Stathis) Stefanidis Studies on the High.
Selection cuts on Bs→ with FTK F. Crescioli, P. Giannetti, M. Dell'Orso, G. Punzi, G. Volpi 2/5/2006.
Tracking at Level 2 for the ATLAS High Level Trigger Mark Sutton University College London 26 th September 2006.
ATLAS Beauty 2002 June Santiago de Compostela ATLAS B-TRIGGER John Baines Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, UK RAL On behalf of the ATLAS Collaboration.
Valeria Perez Reale University of Bern On behalf of the ATLAS Physics and Event Selection Architecture Group 1 ATLAS Physics Workshop Athens, May
Navigation Timing Studies of the ATLAS High-Level Trigger Andrew Lowe Royal Holloway, University of London.
TDAQ Upgrade Software Plans John Baines, Tomasz Bold Contents: Future Framework Exploitation of future Technologies Work for Phase-II IDR.
IOP HEPP: Beauty Physics in the UK, 12/11/08Julie Kirk1 B-triggers at ATLAS Julie Kirk Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Introduction – B physics at LHC –
Muon Trigger Slice Report Sergio Grancagnolo for the Muon Trigger group INFN-University of Lecce CERN Jan 23, 2007.
The Status of the ATLAS Experiment Dr Alan Watson University of Birmingham on behalf of the ATLAS Collaboration.
Atlas CHEP‘2000 Padova, ITALY February 2000 Implementation of an Object Oriented Track Reconstruction Model into Multiple LHC Experiments.
Artemis School On Calibration and Performance of ATLAS Detectors Jörg Stelzer / David Berge.
MOORE MOORE (Muon Object Oriented REconstruction) Track reconstruction in the Muon Spectrometer MuonIdentification MuonIdentification Reconstruction and.
M. Gilchriese Basic Trigger Rates December 3, 2004.
Overview of the High-Level Trigger Electron and Photon Selection for the ATLAS Experiment at the LHC Ricardo Gonçalo, Royal Holloway University of London.
S t a t u s a n d u pd a t e s Gabriella Cataldi (INFN Lecce) & the group Moore … in the H8 test-beam … in the HLT(Pesa environment) … work in progress.
Atlas ACAT2000 Batavia, IL, USA October 2000 More Performance and Implementation of an Object Oriented Track Reconstruction Model in Different OO.
Performance of the ATLAS Trigger with Proton Collisions at the LHC John Baines (RAL) for the ATLAS Collaboration 1.
Tommaso Boccali SNS and INFN Pisa Vertex 2002 Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 3-8 November 2002 High Level Triggers at CMS with the Tracker.
10 January 2008Neil Collins - University of Birmingham 1 Tau Trigger Performance Neil Collins ATLAS UK Physics Meeting Thursday 10 th January 2008.
Muon HLT: status of the algorithms and performance Sergio Grancagnolo for the Muon HLT group.
ATLAS and the Trigger System The ATLAS (A Toroidal LHC ApparatuS) Experiment [1] is one of the four major experiments operating at the Large Hadron Collider.
1 TrigMoore: Status, Plans, Possible Milestones. 2 Moore in HLT- status and ongoing work Package under the CVS directory: Trigger/TrigAlgorithms/TrigMoore.
ATLAS UK physics meeting, 10/01/08 1 Triggers for B physics Julie Kirk RAL Overview of B trigger strategy Algorithms – current status and plans Menus Efficiencies.
ATLAS B trigger Overview of B trigger Di-muon algorithms Performance (efficiency/rates) Menu for data taking experience 7/1/20101ATLAS UK Meeting,
Dmitry Emeliyanov, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
High Level Trigger Studies for the Efstathios (Stathis) Stefanidis
MOORE (Muon Object Oriented REconstruction) MuonIdentification
Low Level HLT Reconstruction Software for the CMS SST
Detector parameters and modelling
Julie Kirk Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
Samples and MC Selection
M.Biglietti (Univ. Naples and INFN Naples)
Presentation transcript:

ATLAS ATLAS Week: 25/Feb to 1/Mar 2002 B-Physics Trigger Working Group Status Report PESA.pdf PESA.ps John Baines Contents: Developments since TDAQ week Updates to execution times LVL2 RoI Guidance to EF Effect of p T thresholds on execution time Effect of luminosity & thresholds on resource requirements RoI Guided B-physics Future Work Conclusions

ATLAS Week 25/Feb to 1/Mar Back of Envelope calculation used for Cost Model Paper Model Results 2001 History since Nov 2001 TDAQ week-1 Set of parameters defined for Paper Model, results presented by Jos & Maris at November 2001 TDAQ week Used to calculate resources for RoI and B-physics triggers at : December 2001: Update to parameters used to calculate resources for RoI triggers No update to parameters for B-physics Trigger Note “HLT Cost Model” sent out by Chris Bee => Apparent large extra resource requirement for Bphysics L = Calculations for 2x10 33 => ~factor 4 increase in CPU requirements for full-scan (2 x occupancy, 2 x rate) Note: Lower requirement of processors for high lumi. menu at L=10 34 Update parameters for FEX times Examine different trigger scenarios and options for different luminosities Note: The resources needed to get the byte-stream data and convert it to objects are not included in the tables.

ATLAS Week 25/Feb to 1/Mar Back of Envelope calculation February 2002: Preliminary paper model results with updated parameters: History since Nov 2001 TDAQ week-2 Note: The resources needed to get the byte-stream data and convert it to objects are not included in the tables. December/January 2002: Update FEX execution times Consider possibilities for reduced B-physics programme: Drop TRT at LVL2 (with loss of J/  (ee) channel) Increase single muon threshold to 8 GeV Restrict running to when L = (second half of fills, poor fills, or if machine doesn’t initially meet expectations). Don’t repeat full-scan at EF, use LVL2 RoI instead sin2  precision for 30fb -1 ( or 1.5 2x10 33 ) TDR : ? L = Changes summarized on following slides No.s in brackets are for different RoS schemes and incl. a 10  s overhead time for the RoI request

ATLAS Week 25/Feb to 1/Mar Execution Times MHz Processor (160 SI95) Muon trigger: Muon FEX : 0.2 ms (was 0.25) (ATL-DAQ ) 1 RoI/event (was 2) Si-FEX : Update FEX time to 0.2 ms (was 4 ms) based on : –SctKalman time of 0.17 ms per TRT seed in B->  X low lumi (ATL-DAQ ) –SctKalman time of 0.19 ms per LVL2 EM seed in jet design lumi –SctHough time of 0.31 ms per LVL2 EM seed in jet low lumi Association of Si and Muon tracks - assumed small c.f. FEX time MU => 10 kHz input rate, 4 kHz after LVL2 mu, 2.5 kHz output rate winconsin.cernhttp://www- winconsin.cern.ch/~atsaul/egamma/latest / Optionally TRT FEX could be run as well or instead of Si FEX - 2 alternative FEX: TRT-LUT ms for EM low lumi TBTREC ms for EM low lumi Assumes TRT FEX run after SCT FEX rate x 0.43, time x 0.52, no. RoI x 0.5 changes c.f. previously rate x 0.44, time x 0.07 was 120 cpu incl. 72 for TRT-scan

ATLAS Week 25/Feb to 1/Mar Execution Times MHz Processor (160 SI95) ID-scan - Pixel Guided : Pixel-Scan : 8 ms (was 5ms - now includes data preparation) SiKalman : 4 ms based on p T >1.5 GeV & incl. data preparation (was 4 ms based on p T > 0.5 GeV, but no data prep.) /level2/Bphys/bmark.html OR TRT Guided : Two alternative FEX: Based on p T > 1.5 GeV Threshold Note: TRT-scan gives more seeds than Pixel Scan particularly TRT-LUT which doesn’t have a stage to combine tracks crossing Barrel-Endcap Changes c.f. previously rate x 0.44, time x 1.6 rate x 0.44, time same was 180 cpu incl. 130 for TRT LUT and 8 to extrapolate tracks outwards

ATLAS Week 25/Feb to 1/Mar EF Execution Times- 4000MHz Processor (160 SI95) xKalman - Full Scan TRT - Guided 160 ms (as before) Pixel - Guided 40 ms LVL2 output rate xKalman - RoI Guided. => RoI Guided reconstruction at the EF expected to be a Factor of faster than full-scan Assume 1 cpu required for Pixel-guided reconstruction in LVL2 RoI Previously incl. 370 for J/  (ee) Changes w.r.t. previously : Rate x 0.2, Time x 0.25 (pixel guided, not TRT-guided) Previously 160 cpu

ATLAS Week 25/Feb to 1/Mar Effect of full-scan p T threshold Pixel-seeded LVL2 reconstruction: TRT-seeded LVL2 reconstruction - xKalman TRT: TRT-seeded LVL2 reconstruction - TRT LUT: All times for 4GHz PC 160 SI95

ATLAS Week 25/Feb to 1/Mar Effect of Threshold & Lumiosity Summary of Back-of-envelope calculations of cpu resources for 3 different scenarious: Latest preliminary paper model results using the same input parameters: LVL2 cpu requirement for high lumi. running matches requirement incl. Bphysics at L=10 33 Note: Overheads for unpacking and creation of objects are not included. ATL-DAQ gives 86 ms for an event with similar occupancy as B->  X at Example: This would mean ~20 extra cpu at the EF for the 33 scenario. All numbers are for 4GHz PC (160 SI95)

ATLAS Week 25/Feb to 1/Mar Look into the possibility of using LVL1 RoI for B-physics triggers: RoI Guided B-Physics TP trigger menu based on LVL1 MU6 RoI plus ID full-scan at LVL2: (See Alan Watson’s talk at B-physics meeting)  6 +  5  6 + e5  6 + B(  )  6 + D s (  (KK)    6 + J/  (ee)  6 : LVL1 ROI,  5: ID full-scan track extrapolated to muon detector e5: ID full-scan track extrapolated to muon detector B(  ), D s (  (KK)   J/  (ee) from tracks reconstructed by ID full0-scan  5: from muon RoI e5: From LVL1 EM5 (E T >2 - 3 GeV) RoI confirmed in the ID at LVL2 B(  ), D s (  (KK)   from LVL1 JET RoI (ET > 5 GeV) with LVL2 full-scan in RoI  x  ~ 1.5 x 1.5 J/  (ee) from LVL1 EM5 RoI with LVL2 full-scan in RoI  x  ~ 1.5 x 1.5 Thresholds of p T >5GeV in the barrel and p T >3GeV in the endcaps seem possible. (See Leandro’s talk) Offers savings due to performing reconstruction in RoI only. The potential saving in CPU and the implications for efficiency have yet to be evaluated.

ATLAS Week 25/Feb to 1/Mar Example: Efficiency for B s - > D s (  (KK)  ) events  p T > 6 GeV,  2.5 D s p T > 1 GeV,  2.4  p T > 1 GeV,  2.5 Efficiency for matching (  ,   5 GeV as a function of B s p T B s p T (GeV) RoI Guided B-Physics Efficiency (%) Example: Multiplicity for EM RoI E T > 2 GeV in B->  X events with  p T > 6 GeV Jet RoI E T > 5 GeV EM RoI E T > 2 GeV Fast Simulation

ATLAS Week 25/Feb to 1/Mar Future Work Descoping of ID may mean that at start-up : 1 pixel layer is missing TRT coverage extends only to |  | < ~1.8 (no long straws in end-cap) Need to study the implications for efficiency and execution time. Two approaches: Extend pixel-scan algorithm to include SCT information Use alternative algorithm developed by Nikos Konstantinidis & Hans Dreverman Evaluate performance of RoI guided B-physics. Evaluate Implications of latest detector layout (esp. pixel layout changes). TRT-scan is expensive in CPU resources, need to look at, instead, extending Pixel + SCT tracks into TRT at LVL2 (i.e. Si tracks seed TRT reconstruction).

ATLAS Week 25/Feb to 1/Mar Conclusions A B-trigger scheme has been shown which could be accommodated within the CPU resources foreseen for RoI-based triggers at high luminosity. Any descoping of the B-physics trigger has implications for the physics programme, e.g. loss of precision for sin2  measurement. New ideas are being pursued : Reconstruction at EF using LVL2 RoI Reconstruction at LVL2 using low p T LVL1 EM and Jet RoI