Step 1 Analysis: Progress Towards the Emittance Paper

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Optics and magnetic field calculation for the Hall D Tagger Guangliang Yang Glasgow University.
Advertisements

Additional Emittance Plots The following plots are derived from Mark’s analysis of the Step 1 data taken in approx. August Mark derived the (rms,
Off-axis Simulations Peter Litchfield, Minnesota  What has been simulated?  Will the experiment work?  Can we choose a technology based on simulations?
1 PID, emittance and cooling measurement Rikard Sandström University of Geneva MICE Analysis phone conference.
Emittance–momentum matrix1 Demonstrating the emittance-momentum matrix Mark Rayner, MICE Video Conference, 21 January Initial 4D.
SLIDE Beam measurements using the MICE TOF counters Analysis meeting, 23 September 2008 Mark Rayner.
30 March Global Mice Particle Identification Steve Kahn 30 March 2004 Mice Collaboration Meeting.
1 September 09Mark Rayner – Emittance measurement by The TOFs1 Emittance measurement by the TOFs Via trace space reconstruction of individual muons. Complementary.
Analysis Meeting – – Slide 1 Beam momentum measurement using TOFs: progress report Analysis Meeting, February 2008 Mark Rayner.
1 PID Detectors & Emittance Resolution Chris Rogers Rutherford Appleton Laboratory MICE CM17.
Sci Fi Simulation Status Malcolm Ellis MICE Meeting Osaka, 2 nd August 2004.
CM23 Harbin January 2009TOF Reconstruction1 TOF reconstruction Mark Rayner CM23 Harbin.
1 G4MICE downstream distributions G4MICE plans Rikard Sandström Universite de Geneve MICE collaboration meeting 27/6-05.
March 31, Status of the TOF, Ckov and Virtual Detector Packages in G4Mice Steve Kahn Brookhaven National Laboratory Mice Collaboration Meeting March.
Linda R. Coney – 24th April 2009 Online Reconstruction & a little about Online Monitoring Linda R. Coney 18 August, 2009.
Chris Rogers, MICE CM16 Wednesday Plenary Progress in Cooling Channel Simulation.
Beam line characterization with the TOFs1 Demonstrating the emittance-momentum matrix Mark Rayner, CM26 California, 24 March Initial.
Diffuser in G4MICE Victoria Blackmore 09/03/10 Analysis Meeting 1/8.
Simulated real beam into simulated MICE1 Mark Rayner CM26.
Analysis Meeting 27 Jan 09Beam Characterization with TOFs1 Beam Characterization with the TOFs Mark Rayner.
Beam Parameter Study - preliminary findings Tim Carlisle.
5 May 2009MICE Analysis - MR1 The December Shifts: Beam Characterization by the Time of Flight System Mark Rayner.
1 G4MICE Analysis of KEK Test Beam Aron Fish Malcolm Ellis CM15 10th June 2006.
Mark Rayner, Analysis workshop 4 September ‘08: Use of TOFs for Beam measurement & RF phasing, slide 1 Use of TOFs for Beam measurement & RF phasing Analysis.
18 August 09Mark Rayner – Momentum measurement by The TOFs1 Momentum measurement by the TOFs A correction to an O(4 MeV/c) bias on the current muon momentum.
Chris Rogers, Analysis Parallel, MICE CM17 Progress in Cooling Channel Simulation.
Stats update Was asked to provide comparison between toy mc and g4mice at two points along z (middle of first and third absorbers) 10,000 events, step.
Analysis of MICE Chris Rogers 1 Imperial College/RAL Thursday 28 October, With thanks to John Cobb.
PPR meeting - January 23, 2003 Andrea Dainese 1 TPC tracking parameterization: a useful tool for simulation studies with large statistics Motivation Implementation.
Emittance measurement: ID muons with time-of-flight Measure x,y and t at TOF0, TOF1 Use momentum-dependent transfer matrices iteratively to determine trace.
Pion test beam from KEK: momentum studies Data provided by Toho group: 2512 beam tracks D. Duchesneau April 27 th 2011 Track  x Track  y Base track positions.
Emittance measurement: ID muons with time-of-flight Measure x,y and t at TOF0, TOF1 Use momentum-dependent transfer matrices to map  path Assume straight.
GlueX Particle Identification Ryan Mitchell Indiana University Detector Review, October 2004.
Feb 10, 2005 S. Kahn -- Pid Detectors in G4MicePage 1 Pid Detector Implementation in G4Mice Steve Kahn Brookhaven National Lab 10 Feb 2005.
Results from Step I of MICE D Adey 2013 International Workshop on Neutrino Factories, Super-beams and Beta- beams Working Group 3 – Accelerator Topics.
TOP counter overview and issues K. Inami (Nagoya university) 2008/7/3-4 2 nd open meeting for proto-collaboration - Overview - Design - Performance - Prototype.
Mark Rayner 14/8/08Analysis Meeting: Emittance measurement using the TOFs 1 Emittance measurement using the TOFs The question: can we use position measurements.
Positional and Angular Resolution of the CALICE Pre-Prototype ECAL Hakan Yilmaz.
1 Statistics David Forrest University of Glasgow May 5 th 2009.
1 A first look at the KEK tracker data with G4MICE Malcolm Ellis 2 nd December 2005.
Linda R. Coney – 5 November 2009 Online Reconstruction Linda R. Coney 5 November 2009.
M. Ellis - MICE Collaboration Meeting - Thursday 28th October Sci-Fi Tracker Performance Software Status –RF background simulation –Beam simulation.
Progress on the beam tracking instrumentation Position measurement device Tests performed and their resolution Decision on electronics Summary.
3 June 2009J. H. Cobb 1 ANALYSIS SUMMARY CM24 Agenda for Analysis parallel session at CM Sunday 31 May 14:00.
Timing measurements at the MICE experiment – 1 The analysis of timing measurements at the Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment Mark Rayner The University.
Design options for emittance measurement systems for the CLIC RTML R Apsimon.
26 Oct 2010PC Physics Requirements of Software from Chris R ~19 Oct. My.
1 DT Local Reconstruction on CRAFT data Plots for approval CMS- Run meeting, 26/6/09 U.Gasparini, INFN & Univ.Padova on behalf of DT community [ n.b.:
Fast Simulation and the Higgs: Parameterisations of photon reconstruction efficiency in H  events Fast Simulation and the Higgs: Parameterisations of.
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.
Analysis meeting: Beam momentum measurements using TOFs Tuesday, 22 January 2008 Slide 1 of 10 Beam momentum measurement using.
Software Overview 1M. Ellis - CM21 - 7th June 2008  Simulation Status  Reconstruction Status  Unpacking Library  Tracker Data Format  Real Data (DATE)
TOF Emittance Pion Emittance Measurement with the TOFs? Mark Rayner 11 December 2008.
Mark Rayner – Analysis SessionCM25, 4 November Beam characterization by the TOFs Mark Rayner The University of Oxford MICE CM25.
Mark Rayner 26/8/08Analysis Meeting: Emittance measurement using the TOFs 1 Measuring emittance with the TOFs Data: –G4MICE has been used to obtain transfer.
M. Ellis - MICE Collaboration Meeting - Wednesday 27th October Sci-Fi Tracker Performance Software Status –RF background simulation –Beam simulation.
Monte Carlo simulation of the particle identification (PID) system of the Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment (MICE) Mice is mainly an accelerator physics.
Mark Dorman – UCL/RAL – Calibration Workshop Talk Update on ND Strip-to-Strip Calibration Work Mark Dorman Calibration Workshop Fermilab, September 7-9.
Mark Rayner – Analysis SessionCM25, 4 November The TOF detectors: Beyond particle identification Mark Rayner The University of Oxford MICE CM25.
TOF Emittance Emittance measurements with the TOFs Mark Rayner 4 December 2008.
Brunel University London Field-off LiH Energy Loss Rhys Gardener CM45 – July 28th.
Global Track Matching and Fitting
Neutrino factory near detector simulation
Early Results from Beam Line Studies Jean-Sebastien Graulich, Geneva
M. Kuhn, P. Hopchev, M. Ferro-Luzzi
TOF Software and Analysis Tools
DT Local Reconstruction on CRAFT data
Introduction Goal: Can we reconstruct the energy depositions of the proton in the brain if we are able to reconstruct the photons produced during this.
Hellenic Open University
Special Considerations for SIDIS
Presentation transcript:

Step 1 Analysis: Progress Towards the Emittance Paper 26/06/2012: CM33 Analysis Session Step 1 Analysis: Progress Towards the Emittance Paper CM33: Analysis Session V. Blackmore

26/06/2012: CM33 Analysis Session The Cogs & Wheels The meaning of “data”, “reconstruction” and “simulation”. The reconstruction procedure.

What do I mean by “simulation”, “reconstruction” and “data”? 26/06/2012: CM33 Analysis Session What do I mean by “simulation”, “reconstruction” and “data”? Simulation Data Mark took a G4Beamline created beam and simulated its passage between TOF0 and TOF1 in G4MICE. We know everything about this beam at TOF0 and TOF1: 𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑧, 𝑝 𝑥 , 𝑝 𝑦 , 𝑝 𝑧 ,𝑡 It does not include any detector effects (e.g. resolution). Simulation is shown in red in subsequent plots. Compiled from Step I data from 2010. Know only 𝑥, 𝑦,𝑡 at TOF0 and TOF1. Position determined from the time’s recorded by PMTs at each end of a slab, e.g., 𝑥= 𝑐 𝑒𝑓𝑓 𝑡 𝐿 − 𝑡 𝑅 +∆ 2 Depends on slab calibration. Data is shown in black in subsequent plots. 𝑡 𝑅 𝑥 𝑡 𝐿

What do I mean by “simulation”, “reconstruction” and “data”? 26/06/2012: CM33 Analysis Session What do I mean by “simulation”, “reconstruction” and “data”? Simulation Data Mark took a G4Beamline created beam and simulated its passage between TOF0 and TOF1 in G4MICE. We know everything about this beam at TOF0 and TOF1: 𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑧, 𝑝 𝑥 , 𝑝 𝑦 , 𝑝 𝑧 ,𝑡 It does not include any detector effects (e.g. resolution). Simulation is shown in red in subsequent plots. Compiled from Step I data from 2010. Know only 𝑥, 𝑦,𝑡 at TOF0 and TOF1. Position determined from the time’s recorded by PMTs at each end of a slab, e.g., 𝑥= 𝑐 𝑒𝑓𝑓 𝑡 𝐿 − 𝑡 𝑅 +∆ 2 Depends on slab calibration. Data is shown in black in subsequent plots. Reconstruction ‘Halfway house’ Derived from simulation. Takes 𝑥, 𝑦,𝑡 and smears according to TOF resolution. Should be comparable to data. Reconstruction is shown in blue in subsequent plots. 𝑡 𝑅 𝑥 𝑡 𝐿

“Reconstructing” Simulation & Data 26/06/2012: CM33 Analysis Session “Reconstructing” Simulation & Data Transfer matrix 𝑥 1 𝑥′ 1 = 𝑀 11 𝑀 12 𝑀 21 𝑀 22 𝑥 0 𝑥′ 0 Marks thesis gives all the details. First, assume the muon travels in a straight line and estimate momentum. Then, assume linear beam transport, and track the muon through Q789, determining the angles 𝑥 ′ , 𝑦 ′ at TOF0 and TOF1. Repeat to improve. 𝑥′ 0 𝑥′ 1 = 1 𝑀 12 − 𝑀 11 1 −1 𝑀 22 𝑥 0 𝑥 1 { 𝑥 0,1 , 𝑦 0,1 , 𝑡} { 𝑥 ′ 0,1 , 𝑦′ 0,1 , 𝑝 𝑧 } 𝑀 𝑥 =𝑂 𝐹 9 𝑂 𝐷 8 𝑂 𝐹 7 𝑂 𝑀 𝑦 =𝑂 𝐷 9 𝑂 𝐹 8 𝑂 𝐷 7 𝑂

Reconstruction Accuracy 26/06/2012: CM33 Analysis Session Reconstruction Accuracy How well does the reconstruction work? The emittances of the Step I data sets. Improvements to make.

Reconstruction Accuracy 26/06/2012: CM33 Analysis Session Reconstruction Accuracy Mark has demonstrated how accurate his algorithm is at previous CMs if you need more detail. Simulation vs. Reconstruction: Then… … and now. ? ? ? After recalculating with the appropriate variables.

Calculated Emittances in Data 26/06/2012: CM33 Analysis Session Calculated Emittances in Data Inc. cuts on TOF slabs, 𝑝 𝑧 , and 𝜒 2 <6

26/06/2012: CM33 Analysis Session Improvements To better demonstrate agreement or disagreement between data and our expectations. Option 1: Remove the effect of detector resolution from data, so we can directly compare with simulation. Calculate the ‘resolution matrix’ from the difference between the covariance matrix describing reconstruction and simulation. Ideally, then subtract this matrix from our data. Problem 1a: Get undesirable negative elements of the resolution matrix. Problem 1b: Simulations only exist for the ‘6mm’ beams. Not clear what to do for the others. Option 2: Remove the effect of dispersion from simulation, reconstruction and data. Quote emittances as 𝜀 𝑥,𝑦 = 𝜖 𝑥,𝑦 + 𝐷 𝑥.𝑦 , where 𝜖 is the emittance with dispersion subtracted, and 𝐷 𝑥,𝑦 is the dispersion in that plane. Problem 2: Differences in the simulation where there shouldn’t be differences!

Sanity Check Please! Next, to the attached pdf plots! 26/06/2012: CM33 Analysis Session Sanity Check Please! Next, to the attached pdf plots! Red = simulation, blue = reconstruction, black = data. All 1D histograms are normalised Dispersion 𝑥 0 → 𝑥 1 𝜇 + and 𝜇 − simulation discrepancy