1Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006 MuScat Validation of G4  Muon Scattering (MuScat) Experiment u Motivation: Ionisation.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Proposal for a new design of LumiCal R. Ingbir, P. Ruzicka, V. Vrba October 07 Malá Skála.
Advertisements

Stefan Roesler SC-RP/CERN on behalf of the CERN-SLAC RP Collaboration
Beam-plug and shielding studies related to HCAL and M2 Robert Paluch, Burkhard Schmidt November 25,
Beam-plug under M2 and HCAL shielding studies Robert Paluch, Burkhard Schmidt October 9,
HARP Anselmo Cervera Villanueva University of Geneva (Switzerland) K2K Neutrino CH Meeting Neuchâtel, June 21-22, 2004.
Study of plastic scintillators for fast neutron measurements
1 Simulation Status/Plans Malcolm Ellis Sci Fi Tracker Meeting Imperial College, 10 th September 2004.
Simulations with ‘Realistic’ Photon Spectra Mike Jenkins Lancaster University and The Cockcroft Institute.
CM31: Multiple Scattering in GEANT4 Timothy Carlisle University of Oxford.
14 Sept 2004 D.Dedovich Tau041 Measurement of Tau hadronic branching ratios in DELPHI experiment at LEP Dima Dedovich (Dubna) DELPHI Collaboration E.Phys.J.
Pion yield studies for proton drive beams of 2-8 GeV kinetic energy for stopped muon and low-energy muon decay experiments Sergei Striganov Fermilab Workshop.
1 Scintillating Fibre Tracker Simulation Malcolm Ellis Imperial College London Tuesday 9 th March 2004.
July 2001 Snowmass A New Measurement of  from KTeV Introduction The KTeV Detector  Analysis of 1997 Data Update of Previous Result Conclusions.
Mar 31, 2005Steve Kahn -- Ckov and Tof Detector Simulation 1 Ckov1, Ckov2, Tof2 MICE Pid Tele-Meeting Steve Kahn 31 March 2005.
Sci Fi Simulation Status Malcolm Ellis MICE Meeting Osaka, 2 nd August 2004.
Progress on the final TWIST measurement of James Bueno, University of British Columbia and TRIUMF on behalf of the Triumf Weak Interaction Symmetry Test.
1 G4MICE downstream distributions G4MICE plans Rikard Sandström Universite de Geneve MICE collaboration meeting 27/6-05.
Bruce Faddegon, UCSF Inder Daftari, UCSF Joseph Perl, SLAC
1 Hadronic In-Situ Calibration of the ATLAS Detector N. Davidson The University of Melbourne.
Jun 27, 2005S. Kahn -- Ckov1 Simulation 1 Ckov1 Simulation and Performance Steve Kahn June 27, 2005 MICE Collaboration PID Meeting.
RF background simulations MICE collaboration meeting Fermilab Rikard Sandström.
Simulation of a Magnetised Scintillating Detector for the Neutrino Factory Malcolm Ellis & Alan Bross Fermilab International Scoping Study Meeting KEK,
GRAS Validation and GEANT4 Electromagnetic Physics Parameters R. Lindberg, G. Santin; Space Environment and Effects Section, ESTEC.
Results from Step I of MICE D Adey 2013 International Workshop on Neutrino Factories, Super-beams and Beta- beams Working Group 3 – Accelerator Topics.
EPECUR – Investigation of narrow baryon resonances Konovalova Elena St. Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute (PNPI) with collaboration Institute of Theoretical.
CALORIMETER system for the CBM detector Ivan Korolko (ITEP Moscow) CBM Collaboration meeting, October 2004.
SHMS Optics Studies Tanja Horn JLab JLab Hall C meeting 18 January 2008.
M ULTIPLE S CATTERING RAL Timothy Carlisle 1.
Multiple Scattering (MSC) in Geant4 Timothy Carlisle Oxford.
International Workshop on Linear Colliders, Geneve Muon reconstruction and identification in the ILD detector N. D’Ascenzo, V.Saveliev.
Experimental Particle Physics PHYS6011 Joel Goldstein, RAL 1.Introduction & Accelerators 2.Particle Interactions and Detectors (2/2) 3.Collider Experiments.
Measurement of F 2 and R=σ L /σ T in Nuclei at Low Q 2 Phase I Ya Li Hampton University January 18, 2008.
Neutron detector developments at LPC Caen  -delayed neutron detectors  current limitations  future issues Search for new solid scintillators (Neutromania)
Feb. 7, 2007First GLAST symposium1 Measuring the PSF and the energy resolution with the GLAST-LAT Calibration Unit Ph. Bruel on behalf of the beam test.
Detector Monte-Carlo ● Goal: Develop software tools to: – Model detector performance – Study background issues – Calculate event rates – Determine feasibility.
Difference between Roman Pots and VELO Very forward tracking is typically done using detectors located in Roman pots. They are far away from the interaction.
1 Performance of a Magnetised Scintillating Detector for a Neutrino Factory Scoping Study Meeting Rutherford Appleton Lab Tuesday 25 th April 2006 M. Ellis.
1 NaI calibrationneutron observation NaI calibration and neutron observation during the charge exchange experiment 1.Improving the NaI energy resolution.
NuFact02, July 2002, London Takaaki Kajita, ICRR, U.Tokyo For the K2K collab. and JHF-Kamioka WG.
The inсlusive produсtion of the meson resonanсes ρ 0 (770), K * (892), f 0 (980), f 2 (1270) in neutrino- nuсleon сharged сurrent (CC) interaсtions Polyarush.
Lukens - 1 Fermilab Seminar – July, 2011 Observation of the  b 0 Patrick T. Lukens Fermilab for the CDF Collaboration July 2011.
HARP measurements of pion yield for neutrino experiments Issei Kato (Kyoto University) for the HARP collaboration Contents: 1.HARP experiment Physics motivations.
MCS: Multiple Coulomb Scattering Sophie Middleton.
Muon detection in NA60  Experiment setup and operation principle  Coping with background R.Shahoyan, IST (Lisbon)
Comments on systematics of corrected MB distributions Karel Safarik (presented by A. Morsch) Meeting of the Minimum Bias and Underlying Event WG CERN,
00 Cooler CSB Direct or Extra Photons in d+d  0 Andrew Bacher for the CSB Cooler Collaboration ECT Trento, June 2005.
J-PARC でのハイパー核ガンマ線分光実験用 散乱粒子磁気スペクトロメータ検出器の準備 状況 東北大理, 岐阜大教 A, KEK B 白鳥昂太郎, 田村裕和, 鵜養美冬 A, 石元茂 B, 大谷友和, 小池武志, 佐藤美沙子, 千賀信幸, 細見健二, 馬越, 三輪浩司, 山本剛史, 他 Hyperball-J.
Comparison between BFEM data and G4 simulation October 18, 2001 Balloon Analysis VRVS meeting T. Mizuno, H. Mizushima, Y. Fukazawa, and T. Kamae
Step IV Studies Timothy Carlisle Oxford. Intro. CM28 – Step III vs Step IV Cooling formula & G4MICE disagree on – Also observed in ICOOL (note #199 –
Predicting the In-System Performance of the CMS Tracker Analog Readout Optical Links Stefanos Dris CERN & Imperial College, London.
T2K Status Report. The Accelerator Complex a Beamline Performance 3 First T2K run completed January to June x protons accumulated.
1 Performance of a Magnetised Scintillating Detector for a Neutrino Factory Scoping Study Meeting U.C. Irvine Monday 21 st August 2006 M. Ellis & A. Bross.
Simulating the RFOFO Ring with Geant Amit Klier University of California, Riverside Muon Collaboration Meeting Riverside, January 2004.
Neutrino DIS measurements in CHORUS DIS2004 Strbske Pleso Alfredo G. Cocco INFN – Napoli.
Feb. 3, 2007IFC meeting1 Beam test report Ph. Bruel on behalf of the beam test working group Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope.
A New Upper Limit for the Tau-Neutrino Magnetic Moment Reinhard Schwienhorst      ee ee
Monte Carlo simulation of the particle identification (PID) system of the Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment (MICE) Mice is mainly an accelerator physics.
Fiducial Cuts for the CLAS E5 Data Set K. Greenholt (G.P. Gilfoyle) Department of Physics University of Richmond, Virginia INTRODUCTION The purpose of.
The MiniBooNE Little Muon Counter Detector
Field-on measurement of multiple scattering
MICE Collaboration Meeting
Track Finding.
Precision Measurement of the Electroproduction of p0 Near Threshold:
Pure  exposure for e/ separation
Comparison Of High Energy Hadronic Interaction Models
Comparison Of High Energy Hadronic Interaction Models
Neutron Detector Simulations for Fast Neutrons with GEANT4
K. Tilley, ISIS, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, UK Introduction
Reports for highly granular hadron calorimeter using software compensation techniques Bing Liu SJTU February 25, 2019.
Search for Narrow Resonance Decaying to Muon Pairs in 2.3 fb-1
Presentation transcript:

1Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006 MuScat Validation of G4  Muon Scattering (MuScat) Experiment u Motivation: Ionisation Cooling requires maximising dE/dx and minimising multiple scattering of ~200 MeV/c muons. u Uncertainty over multiple scattering of muons in region of interest, and extrapolations from other experiments, suggested larger rates of scatters to high angles (unwanted for cooling) than predictions by Moliere. u Dedicated experiment approved at TRIUMF, ran in 2003 measuring a range of solid targets and liquid hydrogen with a collimated 172 +/- 2 MeV/c muon beam. u Scattered muons were tracked with a scintillating fibre tracker, and Time of Flight and NaI calorimeter were used to select a pure (> 99.2%) sample of muons. u Results of MuScat analysis have been accepted for publication in NIM and the preprint can be found on the web: s

2Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006 MuScat Layout & Targets

3Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006 Comparison with G4  In the MuScat paper, the analysis was performed using G4 7.0.p01.  The empty target and thick steel target data was used to tune the Monte Carlo model of the incoming beam and response of the detector.  The scattering distributions were obtained from the raw data by performing a deconvolution that subtracts the effects of background particles, the small contamination from pions and the response and efficiency of the detector from the measured projected scattering distribution in the target.  The deconvolution is achieved using MINUIT and the requirement of symmetry about  = 0 was imposed.

4Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006 No Target and Thick Fe Data Comparison with G4.7.0.p01

5Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006 Scattering Distributions Comparison with G4.7.0.p01

6Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006 More Distributions Comparison with G4.7.0.p01

7Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006 Comparison with G4.8.1  No change to real data (results of analysis as before).  New simulations performed using GEANT4 8.0 and 8.1  G4.8.0 similar to version 7  G4 8.1 shows an improvement in agreement, especially in high angle scattering.  G4 8.1 prediction for LH2 now in much better agreement with data and ELMS simulation.  Still see a strong effect when changing the maximum step size in the target (original simulations used a max step of 10  m).

8Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006

9

10Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006

11Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006

12Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006

13Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006

14Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006

15Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006

16Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006

17Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006

18Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006 Conclusions  For thick, higher Z targets (e.g. Al & Fe) G4 version 7 gave a reasonable description and this is still the case for versions 8.0 and 8.1.  There is still a tendency to over-estimate the rate of scattering to higher angles, however.  For lower Z targets (e.g. LH2, Li, Be) G4 versions 7.x and 8.0 would frequently over-estimate the rate of high angle scattering (by factors of 3 or 4).  G4 version 8.1 gives a much better agreement with both the MuScat data and the ELMS model for LH2.  There is still a strong effect seen on the simulated scattering distribution when changing the maximum step size (always << the target thickness) that is not understood. Is this a problem in G4, or with the way that we are using it?