ECAL Energy Correction for Dead Cells_August

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
CBM Calorimeter System CBM collaboration meeting, October 2008 I.Korolko(ITEP, Moscow)
Advertisements

US CMS H1/H2 Issues1 H C A L Dan is interested in the calibration of the HCAL for jets. He defines “R” as the measured energy of a pion, probably in ADC.
Parameterized Shower Simulation in Lelaps: a Comparison with Geant4 Daniel Birt, Amy Nicholson.
Electromagnetic shower in the AHCAL selection criteria data / MonteCarlo comparison of: handling linearity shower shapes CALICE collaboration meeting may.
The performance of Strip-Fiber EM Calorimeter response uniformity, spatial resolution The 7th ACFA Workshop on Physics and Detector at Future Linear Collider.
Simulation of the RPC Response José Repond Argonne National Laboratory CALICE Collaboration Meeting University Hassan II Casablanca, Morocco September.
Preshower 15/03/2005 P.Kokkas Preshower September Run Data Analysis P. Kokkas.
ECAL Spike Plot Approval ECAL Anomalous Signal Plots Approval Adi Bornheim for ECAL
1 Study of the Tail Catcher Muon Tracker (TCMT) Scintillator Strips and Leakage with Simulated Coil Rick Salcido Northern Illinois University For CALICE.
1Calice-UK Cambridge 9/9/05D.R. Ward David Ward Compare Feb’05 DESY data with Geant4 and Geant3 Monte Carlos. Work in progress – no definitive conclusions.
November 30th, 2006MAPS meeting - Anne-Marie Magnan - Imperial College London 1 MAPS simulation Application of charge diffusion on Geant4 simulation and.
GEM DHCAL Simulation Studies J. Yu* Univ. of Texas at Arlington ALCW, July 15, 2003 Cornell University (*on behalf of the UTA team; S. Habib, V. Kaushik,
FMS review, Sep FPD/FMS: calibrations and offline reconstruction Measurements of inclusive  0 production Reconstruction algorithm - clustering.
Area Between Two Curves 7.1. Area Formula If f and g are continuous functions on the interval [a, b], and if f(x) > g(x) for all x in [a, b], then the.
Study of response uniformity of LHCb ECAL Mikhail Prokudin, ITEP.
Energy Flow and Jet Calibration Mark Hodgkinson Artemis Meeting 27 September 2007 Contains work by R.Duxfield,P.Hodgson, M.Hodgkinson,D.Tovey.
Simulation of direct space charge in Booster by using MAD program Y.Alexahin, N.Kazarinov.
Optimizing DHCAL single particle energy resolution Lei Xia Argonne National Laboratory 1 LCWS 2013, Tokyo, Japan November , 2013.
15 Dec 2010 CERN Sept 2010 beam test: Sensor response study Chris Walmsley and Sam Leveridge (presented by Paul Dauncey) 1Paul Dauncey.
Optimizing DHCAL single particle energy resolution Lei Xia 1 CALICE Meeting LAPP, Annecy, France September 9 – 11, 2013.
DHCAL - Resolution (S)DHCAL Meeting January 15, 2014 Lyon, France Burak Bilki, José Repond and Lei Xia Argonne National Laboratory.
UTA GEM DHCAL Simulation Jae Yu * UTA DoE Site Visit Nov. 13, 2003 (*On behalf of the UTA team; A. Brandt, K. De, S. Habib, V. Kaushik, J. Li, M. Sosebee,
Detection of electromagnetic showers along muon tracks Salvatore Mangano (IFIC)
W-DHCAL Analysis Overview José Repond Argonne National Laboratory.
Positional and Angular Resolution of the CALICE Pre-Prototype ECAL Hakan Yilmaz.
A simple formula for calculating the momentum spread from the longitudinal density distribution and RF form Recycler Meeting March 11, 2009 A. Shemyakin.
G4 Validation meeting (5/11/2003) S.VIRET LPSC Grenoble Photon testbeam Data/G4 comparison  Motivation  Testbeam setup & simulation  Analysis & results.
Hycal Energy Resolution, Timing, &Trigger Efficiency, A cumulative study. Chris Mauney.
1ECFA/Vienna 16/11/05D.R. Ward David Ward Compare these test beam data with Geant4 and Geant3 Monte Carlos. CALICE has tested an (incomplete) prototype.
PHOTON RECONSTRUCTION IN CMS APPLICATION TO H   PHOTON RECONSTRUCTION IN CMS APPLICATION TO H   Elizabeth Locci SPP/DAPNIA, Saclay, France Prague.
13 July 2005 ACFA8 Gamma Finding procedure for Realistic PFA T.Fujikawa(Tohoku Univ.), M-C. Chang(Tohoku Univ.), K.Fujii(KEK), A.Miyamoto(KEK), S.Yamashita(ICEPP),
Photon reconstruction and matching Prokudin Mikhail.
CALOR April Algorithms for the DØ Calorimeter Sophie Trincaz-Duvoid LPNHE – PARIS VI for the DØ collaboration  Calorimeter short description.
Longitudinal shower profile - CERN electron runs Valeria Bartsch University College London.
Lucia Bortko | Optimisation Studies for the BeamCal Design | | IFJ PAN Krakow | Page 1/16 Optimisation Studies for the BeamCal Design Lucia.
1 Instabilities and Phase Space Tomography in RR Alexey Burov RR Talk May
Validation of Geant4 (V4.2) for GLAST-LAT -Comparison with Theory, Beam Test Data and EGS4 – S. Ogata, T. Mizuno, H. Mizushima (Hiroshima/SLAC) P. Valtersson,
Testbeam analysis Lesya Shchutska. 2 beam telescope ECAL trigger  Prototype: short bars (3×7.35×114 mm 3 ), W absorber, 21 layer, 18 X 0  Readout: Signal.
Energy Reconstruction in the CALICE Fe-AHCal in Analog and Digital Mode Fe-AHCal testbeam CERN 2007 Coralie Neubüser CALICE Collaboration meeting Argonne,
14/06/2007Hayg GULER (LLR)1 ATF2 line studies with BDSIM using two different beam inputs parameters.
Member of the Helmholtz Association T. Zhang | Institute of Energy Research – Plasma Physics | Association EURATOM – FZJ Radial Correlation Analysis of.
DESY BT analysis - updates - S. Uozumi Dec-12 th 2011 ScECAL meeting.
LHCf Collaboration Meeting, Catania, 4-6 July 2009 MC comparison: Fluka vs Epics Oscar Adriani.
1 Calice Analysis 21/7/08David Ward Quick look at 2008 e - data; low energy hits in 2006  2008 e - data from Fermilab; July’08  Looked at several runs.
HCAL Leakage Studies CLIC Physics & Detector Meeting 10. November 2008 Christian Grefe CERN.
Michele Faucci Giannelli
BeamCal Simulation for CLIC
Benchmarking MAD, SAD and PLACET Characterization and performance of the CLIC Beam Delivery System with MAD, SAD and PLACET T. Asaka† and J. Resta López‡
The Standard Deviation as a Ruler and the Normal Model
Ageing correction from electron
IHEP group Shashlyk activity towards TDR
Maria Person Gulda , Uriel Nauenberg, Gleb Oleinik,
Interactions of hadrons in the Si-W ECAL
Reflectivity Measurements on Non-ideal Surfaces
Parameterization for ATLAS EMEC
The reconstruction method for GLD PFA
Detector Configuration for Simulation (i)
CMS-Bijing weekly meeting
EM Linearity using calibration constants from Geant4
The graph of f(x) is depicted on the left. At x=0.5,
Mokka vs. LCDG4 Comparison
Rick Salcido Northern Illinois University For CALICE Collaboration
e+/e- Vertical Beam Size during CESR-c Collisions
longitudinal shower profile
Dark current in TESLA linac
NKS2 Meeting with Bydzovsky NKS2 Experiment / Analysis Status
Michele Faucci Giannelli
Song LIANG ihep.ac.cn CMS-IHEP, China
Section 13.6 The Normal Curve
Rick Salcido Northern Illinois University For CALICE Collaboration
Presentation transcript:

ECAL Energy Correction for Dead Cells_August Jie Feng, Corrine Goy, Li Tao LAPP, Annecy

MissingEnergy= F(x, L, E) Principle We assume that the missing energy of the dead cell is a function of the distance of the center of gravity from the dead cell(x), the Layer number(L) and the Energy of the shower(E), as shown in the following expression: MissingEnergy= F(x, L, E) Our purpose is to find the formula of F(x, L, E)

Current Method Currently, the correction of the ECAL dead cell energy is: b=1/2(a+c) Where b is the energy of the dead cell and a and c are the energies of the neighboring cells. This formula works well except at the cell of the center of gravity.

Current Method If the center of gravity of 1D Cluster happens to be at the dead cell, the missing energy will be about 75% of the layer, as shown in the Figure below. The correction formula above can correct 12% of the energy so about 60% of that will still be missing.

Simulation of a dead cell The TProfile of deposited energy without dead cells can be found on the left, while that with a dead cell can be found on the right. We simulate that the dead cell is located at the cell[34] of the Layer[7].

Subtract the profile with a dead cell from that without any dead cell and we get the distribution of the missing energy, as shown in the figure below.

A Direct Correction(Path 2) I study the Radial shower profile in the article by Grindhammer and Peters (http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ex/0001020v1.pdf , formula (23)) : I integrate it along y and get:

A Direct Correction(Path 2) I use the above function to fit the Missing Energy and get: It seems to be better than the one fitted by the Double Gaussian.

Parameterization For the function: Where x is the distance between the dead cell the and shower center, which is computed by the cell ratio method, 2p is the normalization of the core, R_C is the RMS of the core, 2(1-p) is the normalization of the tail and R_T is the RMS of the tail. core tail

Parameterization Example of the Cell_34 and Layer_7:

Parameterization Idea: These 4 parameters is correlated with the Layer number L and the shower energy E. Thus,

Parameterization The fitting parameters change while the Layer number changes. For the 100GeV Test Beam electron, we get:

Parameterization Results:

Parameterization I also analyze those parameters with different Energies. 20GeV positrons, 80GeV positrons, 100GeV electrons, 120GeV electrons and 180GeV electrons. The graph below is the parameter N_1(L) for different energies.

Parameterization Comparing the 5 curves, we can analyze the relation between the parameter and the Energy. For example, the graph below shows the analysis of p0. Thus, we can roughly get:

Conclusion As far as I can do, the deposited energy of a dead cell should be a function of distance from the Shower Center x, the Layer number and the energy of the particle E. Thus, where

Comparison with the old correction The TProfile with the old correction(ADC[i]=(ADC[i-1]+ADC[i+1])/2) is shown in the left, while that with the new correction is shown in the right.