1. Craft09 Visual Summary and Efficiency Trackermaps Giuseppe Zito : Infn Bari Italy Giuseppe Zito, Infn Bari

2. Index - Craft09 Visual Summary -How this was created in one week (instead of the month needed for craft08 data). - Efficiency trackermaps

3. Craft09 Visual Summary Hit occupancy for all biggest runs (44 runs with 100 files or more) Only first 100 files processed for each run (random selection). Allows easy comparison between runs. promptReco datasets used. Rechits taken from ctfWithMaterialTracksP6 “Summary trackermaps” obtained processing many runs are available in the last 3 rows

4. Craft09 Visual Summary http://cmstac05/event_display/vis_sum/craft09index.html Available from: and http://cmsdoc.cern.ch/~gzito/temp/view/craft09index.html From the visual pattern we can classify the runs in 5 groups 1.108526-108686 Noise in TEC-z TEC+z TOB; no mag.field;peak mode; 2.109046-109624 Noise in TEC-z ; mag. field on;peak mode; 3.109718-109897 Noise in TEC-z; no mag. field;peak mode; 4.110308-110315 No noise; no mag. field ;deco mode; 5.110397-111130 No noise; mag. field on; deco mode; Inside a group trackermaps almost identical. The sum of all trackermaps In a group shows the main features of the group.

5. Group1:no mag. field; noise in TEC+z, TEC- z,TOB;peak mode.

6. Group2: mag. field on; noise in TEC-z;pek mode

7. Group 3 : no mag. field; noise in TEC-z;peak mode

8. Group 4 : no mag. field; no noise;deco mode

9. Group5 : mag field on; no noise,deco mode

10. Noise in TEC-z Another summary trackermap shows noisy modules (here in TEC –z for group3). It is a very small number of modules. Their position changes when mag. field is on.

11. Noise in Tec -z Example of event with fake track in Tec -z

12. Noise in TEC -z Selecting all events with a track hitting one of these noisy modules, you get typically 30 events in a run with noise and only 5 in a run without noise. A scan of the 30 events shows that in fact 25 contain a fake track. So the most probable explanation of why we have these few noisy modules (in the cluster occupancy trackermap we have many more) is that these modules appear by chance to make a good track. This explains also because the presence of mag. field changes the position of these modules.

13. How this visual summary was created All trackermaps are now computed with the same script by Nikita that creates the event selection described in: https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/CMS/SWGuideTrackerVisualizationInGlobalRuns This script launches automatically a root macro on each file. In this way I can manage to process around 1000 files of promptReco data in less than an hour(I don't use skims) This has enabled me to have this data only 1 week after Craft09 end (instead of the month needed with Craft08 data where I used CMSSW analyzers) Testing the root macro that computes the trackermap I came across the possibility to use invalid rechits to create efficiency trackermaps

14. Efficiency trackermaps Efficiency trackermaps are summary trackermaps (i.e. you build them using the data from many runs because it needs a large statistics: at least 1000 files to allow the efficiency computation also for modules hit by very few tracks (I require a minimum of 10 tracks to compute the efficiency) They are computed without the need to reconstruct again the event, using the information available in prompReco datasets. In principle they could be computed also using DQM root files provided that a new TkHistoMap is added. This should contain Information about invalid rechits distribution. In fact the efficiency of a single module is computed as Number_of_invalid_rechits/total_number_of_rechits

15. Efficiency trackermaps : limitations -Depends on the track finding algorithm - Can be computed only for modules where the algorithm makes guesses. - For ctfWithMaterialTracksP5 this includes around half the tracker Invalid rechits distribution for ctfWithmaterialtracksP5 collection

16. Efficiency trackermaps Results using the first 10 runs of group5 Numbers near a layer show mean module efficiency in the layer.

17. Efficiency trackermaps: are the results reliable? Yes all well known holes and inefficient modules are found the mean efficiency in a layer agrees with systematic studies done extrapolating good tracks(Keith). The modules in barrel layer show the phi dependency found in Giovanni study (see for example TOB L3)

18. Efficiency trackermaps:does the pattern change in different periods? Efficiency trackermap from the 10 runs in group2: can you spot the differences?

19. Efficiency trackermaps:does the pattern change in different periods? Yes and the changes are connected to changes in tracker behaviour! Answer: 1)Tib L3 has a shadow on the first half due to the fact that a block of modules was off in a single run. 2) In TEC-z 1,2,3,5 the noise present has inhibited to the algorithm the discovery of a small group of inefficient modules. This probably means that the noise in TEC-z has not only created a lot of fake tracks (of no use to find inefficient modules) but has also altered the reconstruction of cosmic tracks in such a way that these can’t any more find inefficient modules. 3)The Pixel has also changed a lot: can Petra confirm this big change In efficiency?

20. Summary A Visual Summary of hit occupancy trackermaps can now be built in a few days using promptReco datasets A new summary trackermap that is able to show the efficiency in about half the SiStrip Tracker modules can be computed without need to reconstruct again tracks. In theory we can built it directly from DQM root files provided that we store the distribution of invalid rechits in a TkHistoMap.