Performance DPDs and trigger commissioning Preparing input to DPD task force.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Jet Slice Status Report Ricardo Gonçalo (LIP) and David Miller (Chicago) For the Jet Trigger Group Trigger General Meeting – 9 July 2014.
Advertisements

Releases and Validation Status Simon George, David Strom, Dmitry Emeliyanov, Monika Wielers, Ricardo Goncalo Trigger Open Meeting – 15 July 2009.
Releases & validation Simon George & Ricardo Goncalo Royal Holloway University of London HLT UK – RAL – 13 July 2009.
Resources for the ATLAS Offline Computing Basis for the Estimates ATLAS Distributed Computing Model Cost Estimates Present Status Sharing of Resources.
TRIGGER STATUS AND MENU OPTIMIZATION LHCC Referee Meeting with ATLAS – 7 th July 2009 Ricardo Gonçalo (RHUL) on behalf of ATLAS Trigger/DAQ.
SLUO LHC Workshop, SLACJuly 16-17, Analysis Model, Resources, and Commissioning J. Cochran, ISU Caveat: for the purpose of estimating the needed.
Trigger Data Formats From CBNT to ESD and/or DPD June 11, 2008 Fabrizio Salvatore, Ricardo Gonçalo, RHUL.
1 Using the pHE data to measure the beam e ’s from  + decay David Jaffe and Pedro Ochoa April 12 th 2007  Reminder  Systematic from background  Horn.
ATLAS Analysis Model. Introduction On Feb 11, 2008 the Analysis Model Forum published a report (D. Costanzo, I. Hinchliffe, S. Menke, ATL- GEN-INT )
TRIGGER DATA FOR PHYSICS ANALYSIS ATLAS Software Tutorial – 22 nd to 24 th April 2009 Ricardo Gonçalo – Royal Holloway.
O FFLINE T RIGGER M ONITORING TDAQ Training 30 July 2010 On behalf of the Trigger Offline Monitoring Experts team.
Quality Control B. von Haller 8th June 2015 CERN.
Trigger Tools for Physics Analysis Some use cases Building a data sample Event by event analysis Input from across the Atlantic conclusions Thank you!
Event Metadata Records as a Testbed for Scalable Data Mining David Malon, Peter van Gemmeren (Argonne National Laboratory) At a data rate of 200 hertz,
TRIGGER-AWARE ANALYSIS TUTORIAL ARTEMIS Workshop – Pisa – 18 th to 19 th June 2009 Alessandro Cerri (CERN), Ricardo Gonçalo – Royal Holloway.
News from the Beatenberg Trigger Workshop Ricardo Gonçalo - 18 February 2009 Higgs WG Meeting during ATLAS Week.
Trigger validation for Event size TrigDecision Jets Electrons Ricardo Gonçalo, RHUL Physics Validation Meeting – 9 October 2007.
Ricardo Gonçalo (RHUL) Higgs WG meeting – 28 th August, 2007 Outline: Introduction & release plans Progress in menus for cm -2 s -1 Workshop on trigger.
Trigger Menus Invisible Higgs input to trigger menus for initial running 4/9/2007 Invisible Higgs CSC Note meeting Ricardo Goncalo, RHUL.
 Optimization and usage of D3PD Ilija Vukotic CAF - PAF 19 April 2011 Lyon.
Plans for Trigger Software Validation During Running Trigger Data Quality Assurance Workshop May 6, 2008 Ricardo Gonçalo, David Strom.
Trigger Offline DQ Monitoring DQ Meeting – 27 Oct 2009 Ricardo Goncalo for Trigger Offline Monitoring.
TRIGGER STATUS AND MENU OPTIMIZATION LHCC Referee Meeting with ATLAS – 7 th July 2009 Ricardo Gonçalo (RHUL) on behalf of the ATLAS TDAQ.
Preparation for the Beatenberg Trigger Workshop Ricardo Gonçalo Higgs WG Meeting during ATLAS Week - 4 Dec.08.
Preparation for the Beatenberg Trigger Workshop Ricardo Gonçalo Higgs sub-group conveners meeting – 9 Jan.09.
OFFLINE TRIGGER MONITORING TDAQ Training 5 th November 2010 Ricardo Gonçalo On behalf of the Trigger Offline Monitoring Experts team.
DPDs and Trigger Plans for Derived Physics Data Follow up and trigger specific issues Ricardo Gonçalo and Fabrizio Salvatore RHUL.
ATLAS: Heavier than Heaven? Roger Jones Lancaster University GridPP19 Ambleside 28 August 2007.
Status of trigger software and EDM Ricardo Gonçalo, RHUL – on behalf of ATLAS TDAQ.
Trigger Offline Expert Report Simon George (RHUL), Ricardo Gonçalo (RHUL) Trigger General Meeting – 25 th November 2009.
Organisation of the Beatenberg Trigger Workshop Ricardo Gonçalo Higgs WG Meeting - 22 Jan.09.
Level 3 Trigger Leveling D. Cutts(Brown), A. Garcia-Bellido(UW), A. Haas(Columbia), G. Watts(UW)
Artemis School On Calibration and Performance of ATLAS Detectors Jörg Stelzer / David Berge.
David Adams ATLAS DIAL: Distributed Interactive Analysis of Large datasets David Adams BNL August 5, 2002 BNL OMEGA talk.
Moritz Backes, Clemencia Mora-Herrera Département de Physique Nucléaire et Corpusculaire, Université de Genève ATLAS Reconstruction Meeting 8 June 2010.
Update on Diffractive Dijet Production Search Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham Birmingham ATLAS Weekly Meeting 13/09/2012.
PESAsim – the e/  analysis framework Validation of the framework First look at a trigger menu combining several signatures Short-term plans Mark Sutton.
NA62 computing resources update 1 Paolo Valente – INFN Roma Liverpool, Aug. 2013NA62 collaboration meeting.
General requirements for BES III offline & EF selection software Weidong Li.
ATLAS Computing Requirements LHCC - 19 March ATLAS Computing Requirements for 2007 and beyond.
A. Gheata, ALICE offline week March 09 Status of the analysis framework.
AliRoot survey: Analysis P.Hristov 11/06/2013. Are you involved in analysis activities?(85.1% Yes, 14.9% No) 2 Involved since 4.5±2.4 years Dedicated.
TAGS in the Analysis Model Jack Cranshaw, Argonne National Lab September 10, 2009.
H->bb Weekly Meeting Ricardo Gonçalo (RHUL) HSG5 H->bb Weekly Meeting, 22 February 2011.
Trigger Input to First-Year Analysis Model Working Group And some soul searching… Trigger Open Meeting – 29 July 2009.
Victoria, Sept WLCG Collaboration Workshop1 ATLAS Dress Rehersals Kors Bos NIKHEF, Amsterdam.
L1Calo EM Efficiencies Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham L1Calo Joint Meeting, Stockholm 29/06/2011.
Ilija Vukotic Data size and IO performance report ATLAS Software & Computing Workshop.
ELSSISuite Services QIZHI ZHANG Argonne National Laboratory on behalf of the TAG developers group ATLAS Software and Computing Week, 4~8 April, 2011.
Elliptic flow of D mesons Francesco Prino for the D2H physics analysis group PWG3, April 12 th 2010.
Planning sample T Ricardo Gonçalo, RHUL. What we’re doing… We are putting together a wish list for: – Signal MC samples to be generated when there are.
H->bb Note Plans for Summer Ricardo Gonçalo (RHUL) on behalf of the HSG5 H->bb group Higgs Working Group Meeting, 9 June 2011.
Points from DPD task force First meeting last Tuesday (29 th July) – Need to have concrete proposal in 1 month – Still some confusion and nothing very.
Meeting with University of Malta| CERN, May 18, 2015 | Predrag Buncic ALICE Computing in Run 2+ P. Buncic 1.
1 Plans for the Muon Trigger CSC Note. 2 Muon Trigger CSC Studies General performance studies and trigger rate evalution for the full slice Evaluation.
H->bb Weekly Meeting Ricardo Gonçalo (RHUL) HSG5 H->bb weekly meeting, 16 August 2011.
Oct 16, 2009T.Kurca Grilles France1 CMS Data Distribution Tibor Kurča Institut de Physique Nucléaire de Lyon Journées “Grilles France” October 16, 2009.
WLCG November Plan for shutdown and 2009 data-taking Kors Bos.
Trigger release and validation status and plans David Strom (Oregon), Simon George (RHUL), Ricardo Gonçalo (RHUL)
MET Slice Monitoring Xiaowen Lei, Venkat Kaushik Ken Johns.
3rd April Richard Hawkings Analysis models in the top physics group  A few remarks …  What people are doing now  Where we are going - Top reconstruction.
H->bb Note Plans for Summer Ricardo Gonçalo (RHUL) HSG5 H->bb weekly meeting, 21 June 2011.
Introduction 08/11/2007 Higgs WG – Trigger meeting Ricardo Gonçalo, RHUL.
Metadata and Supporting Tools on Day One David Malon Argonne National Laboratory Argonne ATLAS Analysis Jamboree Chicago, Illinois 22 May 2009.
for the Offline and Computing groups
Status and Prospects of The LHC Experiments Computing
ALICE Computing Upgrade Predrag Buncic
Combining Effect Sizes
الأستاذ المساعد بقسم المناهج وطرق التدريس
Presentation transcript:

Performance DPDs and trigger commissioning Preparing input to DPD task force

Tier0 CAF ESD/DPD Monitoring histos Dedicated ntuples for commissioning Runs over all streams and all runs Will not produce ntuples later Test new menus Ad-hoc ESD/ntuple production for subset of data Priority must be menu and bug fix testing No capacity for large scale data analysis In the long term, any analysis that requires large datasets will need the Tier0 results Full data access at ESD level of detail will not be possible – this is where performance DPDs come in CAF resources will be limited also by the priority of tasks – Testing new menus and urgent bug fixes will take priority over everything else – We don’t have the resources (computing AND people) to run large ntuple productions in the CAF for long Ricardo GonçaloTrigger Open Meeting 27/5/20092

Performance DPDs Performance DPDs have ESD-level information for in-depth performance studies – Complete set of trigger objects and navigation – No trigger navigation/object slimming in performance DPDs Currently, 9 performance DPDs are planned/produced – Each comes from a single trigger stream – A fraction of events from that stream are included in the DPD if randomly selected by a “prescaler” (passthrough, in trigger talk) Size is constrained to be 10% of the total AOD size for each DPD – Using combination of skimming (event selection) and slimming (reduction of information content) – Size targets were achieved in current DPD definitions based on FDR2 tests (so, take this with a pinch of salt…) – The exact value of the skimming cuts is likely to evolve significantly in early running (to adjust size estimates to reality) Currently: “commissioning/cosmics” DPDs and “performance” DPDs, but only performance DPDs to be produced The current definitions had no direct input from the trigger slices – Are they useful for us? – See: Ricardo Gonçalo3Trigger Open Meeting 27/5/2009

Ricardo Gonçalo4Trigger Open Meeting 27/5/2009

Performance DPD use in the trigger Performance DPDs would be the natural choice for studies requiring large data samples – They will be the only way to access the full data set at ESD-level detail – Parameter tuning and performance studies – Must be careful to consider the bias imposed by skimming cuts This should NOT be an issue for very early data: – Initial commissioning will need dedicated ntuple production – Assume access to the full ESD will exist for initial data A big concern in the trigger is the skimming selection: – Must be able to look at all events from a given stream and be free from offline reconstruction bias – Bias-free “prescaled” (passthrough in trigger talk) events from performance DPDs may not be enough Ricardo Gonçalo5Trigger Open Meeting 27/5/2009

Possible plans for trigger commissioning and performance studies Finding problems (hours) Fixing bugs + testing (1-2 days) Parameter tuning (few days) Performance studies (>1-2 days) Commissioning Some dedicated ntuple production in T0; maybe also in CAF for subset of data MonitoringESD/Dedicated ntuple Needs smallish specific samples (e.g. 1 stream for 1 lumi block) ESD/Dedicated ntuple More data, possibly from a given stream ESD/Dedicated ntuple Even more data; need to consider bias with great care Stable running No full ESD access No dedicated ntup CAF for small sets MonitoringESD/DPD/D3PD + ad-hoc production in the CAF ESD/DPD/D3PD + dedicated production in the CAF DPD/D3PD Ricardo Gonçalo6Trigger Open Meeting 27/5/2009