1. Test Beam 2003 Some Preliminary Results CMS Week Sep-2003

2.  Trigger “quality” for normal incidence  TRAC0 resolution (position and angle) for different angles Outlook Trigger (BTI & TRACO) information from the output of TSS-TSM is checked using tracks obtained from chamber TDC hits ( Trigger Configuration: SET STD-DEF)

3. Selection of “good” events By cutting on  2 No trigger for some “good” events HLT correspond to “good” hit times Most of LLT correspond with delta rays TSS-TSM: BTI Trigger quality vs Meantimers Taking out  -rays (by cutting on  2 ) NO BTI trigger events are concentrated mainly near Ibeams but still ~0.65% out of Ibeams. Trigger on Correct BX Tracks with hits in the 4 layers Meantimers from SL 

4. TSS-TSM: BTI Trigger quality vs track fit quality (I) Fitted track “quality” redefined: If track of N-hits has  2 > 2 the ¨worst¨ hit is removed and refitted with N-1 hits. Selection of N´= 4 hit tracks 2 Cases studied depending on the number of hits per cell in track A) At least 1 cell with 2 hits (Multi-hit) B) ONLY 1 hit per cell (Single-hit)

5. TSS-TSM: BTI Trigger quality vs track fit quality (II) TSS-TSM: BTI Trigger quality vs track fit quality (II) Total Trigger efficiency: 97.56  0.08 HLT: 94.86  0.12 LLT: 5.14  0.12 Total Trigger efficiency: 99.49  0.03 HLT: 98.99  0.04 LLT: 1.01  0.03 Trigger on Correct BX A) Multi-hitB) Single - hit

6. Selection of “good” events on SL PHI2 based on: Hits on 4 layers Good fitted track (cut on  2 ) Selection of Events on SL PHI2 High Trigger Quality “expected”

7. TSS-TSM: TRACO quality vs Meantimers HL triggers correspond mostly with delta rays There is a small fraction of events with “good MT” and no HH trigger Previous events selected on SL phi2 and track with hits in 4 layers on SL phi1 HH = 89.2 % HL = 7.5 % HH = 89.2 % HL = 7.5 % Triggers on Correct BX

8. Selection of “good” events on SL PHI2 AND SLPHI1 Hits on 4 layers Good fitted track (cut on  2 ) HL 1.7% Ho,Hi0.9% LL,Lo,Li 0.1% NO TRACO0.3% Statistics for “good” events on both SLs HH97% No correlations for “no HH” with respect to MT values

9. No HH events No correlations for missing TRACO events with respect to chamber position.

10. Dependence of TSS-TSM: TRACO Trigger quality with fit qualities (I) Again fitted track “quality” redefined 2 Cases studied depending on the number of hits per cell in track A) At least 1 cell with 2 hits (Multi-hit) B) ONLY 1 hit per cell (Single-hit) HH HL No trigger

11. Dependence of TSS-TSM: TRACO Trigger quality with fit qualities (I) Trigger on Correct BX A) Multi-hit B) Single - hit Quality of reconstructed Track 4 + 4 4 + 3 & 3 + 4 4 + x & x + 4 Total Trig. Eff.98.03  0.1894.71  0.6594.38  0.67 Qual  expect. 89.33  0.4161.30  1.4690.61  0.88 Qual  expect.10.67  0.4138.70  1.46 9.39  0.88 A) Multi-hit Quality of reconstructed Track 4 + 4 4 + 3 & 3 + 4 4 + x & x + 4 Total Trig. Eff.99.83  0.0299.83  0.0499.42  0.13 Qual  expect. 99.86  0.0676.59  0.4699.27  0.15 Qual  expect. 1.14  0.0623.41  0.46 0.73  0.15 B) Single - hit 4 + 4

12. A first look at 2-  Trigger Selection of 2-  events: 2 fitted tracks 4+4 on chamber && TRACO HH, HL, LL Position of the best track different from TRACO position THEN We look for a second muon on TRACO compatible with the chamber track 4 + 4 & HH Quality of the second muon Quality of first TRACO muon HHHH,HL,LL Total Trig. Eff. for 2 nd muon 69.90  4.5263.50  0.50 Qual  expect. 90.28  3.4988.50  1.46

13. Reconstruction of tracks TRACO vs Chamber Selection of “golden” tracks on chamber and TRACO: Chamber: Tracks with hits in 4 layers on SL PHI1 with  2 < 0.6 & Tracks with hits in 4 layers on SL PHI2 with  2 < 0.6 TRACO: HH triggers on correct BX

14. TRACO PHI coordenate correlated with chamber position Trigger Position = 1.06 x Chamber + offset Different offsets for different regions (TRACO’s) TRACO vs Chamber positions

15. TRACO: Position resolution for different angles TRACO resolution in position similar for all angles: ~0.5-0.6 mm Different region of cells on SL PHI2

16. Angle Reconstruction Angle Reconstruction Traco–Chamber angle  = 1 mrad  =-4 mrad  =-1 mrad  = 3 mrad  = 7 mrad  = 3 mrad Angle resolution ~0.3-0.4 deg (~ 5-7 mrad)

17. Summary Preliminary results show a good trigger performance for TRACO and BTI There is a clear correlation between chamber performance and trigger response (as expected ! ) Data indicate trigger “intrinsic inefficiencies” (good chamber track but no trigger) lower than 1%. TRACO track resolution (for HH) at different angles: ~ 0.5-0.6 mm ~ 5 - 7 mrad are in good agreement with the “theoretical” expectations