CMS-Bijing weekly meeting

Slides:



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

Tracey Berry1 Looking into e &  for high energy e/  Dr Tracey Berry Royal Holloway.
The performance of Strip-Fiber EM Calorimeter response uniformity, spatial resolution The 7th ACFA Workshop on Physics and Detector at Future Linear Collider.
1 Update on Photons Graham W. Wilson Univ. of Kansas 1.More on  0 kinematic fit potential in hadronic events. 2.Further H-matrix studies (with Eric Benavidez).
Application of Neural Networks for Energy Reconstruction J. Damgov and L. Litov University of Sofia.
Evaluation of G4 Releases in CMS (Sub-detector Studies) Software used Electrons in Tracker Photons in the Electromagnetic Calorimeter Pions in the Calorimeter.
Angular resolution study of isolated gamma with GLD detector simulation 2007/Feb/ ACFA ILC Workshop M1 ICEPP, Tokyo Hitoshi HANO collaborated with Acfa-Sim-J.
Irakli Chakaberia Final Examination April 28, 2014.
Event Reconstruction in SiD02 with a Dual Readout Calorimeter Detector Geometry EM Calibration Cerenkov/Scintillator Correction Jet Reconstruction Performance.
Kati Lassila-Perini/HIP HIP CMS Software and Physics project evaluation1/ Electron/ physics in CMS Kati Lassila-Perini HIP Activities in the.
1 Calorimetry Simulations Norman A. Graf for the SLAC Group January 10, 2003.
ECAL PID1 Particle identification in ECAL Yuri Kharlov, Alexander Artamonov IHEP, Protvino CBM collaboration meeting
Feasibility Study of Forward Calorimeter in ALICE experiment Sanjib Muhuri Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre Kolkata.
G4 Validation meeting (5/11/2003) S.VIRET LPSC Grenoble Photon testbeam Data/G4 comparison  Motivation  Testbeam setup & simulation  Analysis & results.
Calorimeter in front of MUCh Mikhail Prokudin. Overview ► Geometry and acceptance ► Reconstruction procedure  Cluster finder algorithms  Preliminary.
Interactions of hadrons in the SiW ECAL Towards paper Naomi van der Kolk.
PHOTON RECONSTRUCTION IN CMS APPLICATION TO H   PHOTON RECONSTRUCTION IN CMS APPLICATION TO H   Elizabeth Locci SPP/DAPNIA, Saclay, France Prague.
Bangalore, India1 Performance of GLD Detector Bangalore March 9 th -13 th, 2006 T.Yoshioka (ICEPP) on behalf of the.
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.
Validation of EM Part of Geant4
Fast Shower Simulation in ATLAS Calorimeter Wolfgang Ehrenfeld – University of Hamburg/DESY On behalf of the Atlas-Calorimeter and Atlas-Fast-Parameterisation.
CALOR April Algorithms for the DØ Calorimeter Sophie Trincaz-Duvoid LPNHE – PARIS VI for the DØ collaboration  Calorimeter short description.
Software offline tutorial, CERN, Dec 7 th Electrons and photons in ATHENA Frédéric DERUE – LPNHE Paris ATLAS offline software tutorial Detectors.
ECAL software development Yuri Kharlov IHEP Protvino.
BESIII EMC Simulation & Reconstruction He Miao
Cal Cluster ID (a.k.a. Eflow) Gary R. Bower, SLAC Santa Cruz LCD Workshop June 28, 2002.
Longitudinal shower profile - CERN electron runs Valeria Bartsch University College London.
7/13/2005The 8th ACFA Daegu, Korea 1 T.Yoshioka (ICEPP), M-C.Chang(Tohoku), K.Fujii (KEK), T.Fujikawa (Tohoku), A.Miyamoto (KEK), S.Yamashita.
2005/07/12 (Tue)8th ACFA Full simulator study of muon detector and calorimeter 8th ACFA Workshop at Daegu, Korea 2005/07/12 (Tue) Hiroaki.
BESIII offline software group Status of BESIII Event Reconstruction System.
1 Angular resolution study of isolated gamma with GLD detector simulation 2007/Feb/5 ACFA ILC Workshop M1 ICEPP, Tokyo Hitoshi HANO On behalf of the Acfa-Sim-J.
3/06/06 CALOR 06Alexandre Zabi - Imperial College1 CMS ECAL Performance: Test Beam Results Alexandre Zabi on behalf of the CMS ECAL Group CMS ECAL.
FP-CCD GLD VERTEX GROUP Presenting by Tadashi Nagamine Tohoku University ILC VTX Ringberg Castle, May 2006.
Converted photon and π 0 discrimination based on H    analysis.
1/13 Work progress J. Tao CMS-IHEP/Beijing
IHEP Hadron Shower Shape Song LIANG ihep.ac.cn CMS-IHEP, China
On behalf of the Acfa-Sim-J Group
CEPC ScECAL Optimization for the 3th CEPC Physics Software Meeting
 discrimination with converted photons
Huagen Xu IKP: T. Randriamalala, J. Ritman and T. Stockmanns
The Optimized Sensor Segmentation for the Very Forward Calorimeter
CMS-Bijing weekly meeting
Parameterization for ATLAS EMEC
Study of Gamma+Jets production
The reconstruction method for GLD PFA
Detector Configuration for Simulation (i)
Electron Identification Based on Boosted Decision Trees
Status of ECAL Optimization Study
Simulation study for Forward Calorimeter in LHC-ALICE experiment
EM Linearity using calibration constants from Geant4
Comparison between Geant4, Fluka and the TileCal test-beam data
 discrimination with converted photons
Data/ Monte Carlo comparisons for the EMC
Single Particle Geant4 simulation for the sPHENIX PRESHOWER
CMS-Bijing weekly meeting
Backgrounds using v7 Mask in 9 Si Layers at a Muon Higgs Factory
CMS-Bijing weekly meeting
Michele Faucci Giannelli
Song LIANG ihep.ac.cn CMS-IHEP, China
Song LIANG ihep.ac.cn CMS-IHEP, China
Status of CEPC HCAL Optimization Study in Simulation LIU Bing On behalf the CEPC Calorimeter working group.
Song LIANG ihep.ac.cn CMS-IHEP, China
Converted photon and π0 discrimination based on H  cut-based analysis Zhen Zhang IHEP
CMS-Bijing weekly meeting
Steve Magill Steve Kuhlmann ANL/SLAC Motivation
 discrimination with converted photons
LC Calorimeter Testbeam Requirements
CMS-Bijing weekly meeting
Presentation transcript:

CMS-Bijing weekly meeting Unconverted Gamma/Pi0 discrimination in ECAL Endcap with CMSSW_3_1_2 J.Tao IHEP-Beijing CMS-Bijing weekly meeting Nov. 20, 2009

Outline Uncoverted EE case: Analysis with variables from CMS AN-2008/063 : 25 variables Trying the discrimination in CMSSW_3_1_2 Analysis with EM shower formulae fitting: Formulae validation for the EE case TMA analysis with the EM fitting results

Preview the 25 variables from CMS AN-2008/063

TMVA training results for Unconv EE: BDT & MLP with PT 15-25GeV the first datasets of Gamma&Pi0 VtxSmearedEarly10TeVCollision the second datasets of Gamma&Pi0 VtxSmearedGauss ~30% <20% NN results with CSA07 H2GaGa and Gam+jets samples

Vertex Smear of the First datasets First datasets of single particles (Gamma&Pi0) in SW_3_1_2 : Configuration/StandardSequences/VtxSmearedEarly10TeVCollision_cff (as the default one used in SW31X, using cmsDriver.py to produce the cfg file) Sigma(x/y)~46um Early10TeVCollisionVtxSmearingParameters = cms.PSet( Phi = cms.double(0.0), BetaStar = cms.double(300.0), Emittance = cms.double(7.03e-08), Alpha = cms.double(0.0), SigmaZ = cms.double(3.8), TimeOffset = cms.double(0.0), Y0 = cms.double(0.0), X0 = cms.double(0.0322), Z0 = cms.double(0.0) ) "BetafuncEvtVtxGenerator" sqrt(femittance*(fbetastar+(((z-z0)*(z-z0))/fbetastar)));

Vertex Smear of the Second datasets Reproduce the datasets of single particles again in SW_3_1_2: Configuration/StandardSequences/VtxSmearedGauss_cff GaussVtxSmearingParameters = cms.PSet( MeanX = cms.double(0.0), MeanY = cms.double(0.0), MeanZ = cms.double(0.0), SigmaY = cms.double(0.0015), SigmaX = cms.double(0.0015), SigmaZ = cms.double(5.3), TimeOffset = cms.double(0.0) ) For 14TeV, also SCA07 samples

25 variables’ distributions from the first datasets: ET=20GeV (I)

25 variables’ distributions from the first datasets: ET=20GeV (II)

25 variables’ distributions from the second datasets: ET=20GeV (I)

25 variables’ distributions from the second datasets: ET=20GeV (II)

25 variables’ distributions from CMS AN-2008/063: ET=20GeV (I)

25 variables’ distributions from CMS AN-2008/063: ET=20GeV (II)

EM shower Formulae validation for the EE case Different geometry with EB case Different paramters in COG calculation using the log weighting technique. 25 layers along the particle direction; Same logitudinal paramters in the Gamma-functon, started from the front face of EE. Same as the EB B-on case, 5 parameters were used in Minuit minimization procedure: A、 ΔE/Edep5x5 where ΔE=E0-Edep5x5、、1、2 5x5 crystal array was used for the validation Front face: 28.62×28.62 mm2 Rear face: 30×30 mm2 Length: 220mm ~ 24.7 X0 Supercrystal: 5×5 crystals Dee (½ endcap): 3662 crystals Each silicon divided into 32 strips with a pitch of 1.9 mm. Each plane is preceded by a thin absorber of 1.9 X0 and 0.9 X0 respectively. A total of 4304 detectors are needed, leading to 137728 channels. Single Gamma Samples with E=50GeV, Eta=2.0, Phi=1.5 0.1%

EM shower Formulae Fitting in EE Single Gamma Samples with E=50GeV, Eta=2.0, Phi=1.5 2000 gamma evetns, 1135 unconverted gamma evetns, 1006 FitOk events: FitStatus==3 && parameters not at it’s limit FitStatus η φ 1 2 5 6 10 25 4 3 11 16 21 9 7 8 12 22 19 18 17 14 15 13 20 24 23 Crystal (or cell) number

Fit parameters

Fit parameters for unconverted case in EB with SW1_6_7

Fit Ok / Unconverted (efficiency) TMVA analysis with 6 fitting variables MC samples: Single , π0 → samples in EE in CMSSW_3_1_2 with VtxSmearedGauss 6 PT Gen.bins: 15-25GeV;25-35GeV; 35-45GeV; 45-55GeV;55-65GeV;65-75GeV 6 PT bins of Rec. photon: 20-25GeV 25-35GeV 35-45GeV 45-55GeV 55-65GeV 65-75GeV Method: Parametric EM shower fitting variables: 6 variables A、 ΔE/Edep5x5 where ΔE=E0-Edep5x5、、1、2、 2/Edep5x5 Analysis FitOk events Fit Ok / Unconverted (efficiency) PT bins (GeV)  π0 20-25 22507 / 29352 (76.7%) 8591 / 12993 (66.1%) 25-35 37133 / 48349 (76.8%) 17210 / 25199 (68.3%) 35-45 43523 / 54734 (79.5%) 17261 / 24091 (71.65%) 45-55 38744 / 47630 (81.3%) 17402 / 23192 (75.0%) 55-65 37927 / 45330 (83.7%) 16683 / 21319 (78.3%) 65-75 32182 / 36853 (87.3%) 13525 / 16266 (83.2%)

Preliminary results of TMVA analysis with 6 fitting variables 20-25GeV 25-35GeV 35-45GeV 45-55GeV 55-65GeV 65-75GeV ~30% π0 rejection efficiency for keeping 90% photon efficincy

6 inputs variables: PT25-35GeV Need to check

Summary For Unconverted /π0 discrimination in the ECAL endcap, the onl variables with the information in ES, nos so powerful . EM shower formulae was valided in EE case, the results are not so bad or not so good. For the Unconverted /π0 discrimination in ECAL EE, the parametric shower shape fitting method was tried in CMSSW_3_1_2, ~30% π0 rejection efficiency for keeping 90% photon efficincy can be obtained for the preliminary analysis. The fitting ok efficiency is lower than ~90%, that’s a problem. The analysis codes maybe need further check.

Backup slides

Position measurement of cluster using log weighting technique @CMS Earlier method need correction: Position of cluster can be calculated with where xi the position of crystal i, and Wi is the log weight of the crystal— the log of the fraction of the cluster energy contained in the crystal, calculated with the formula: where the weight is constrained to be positive, or is otherwise set to zero. W0 then controls the smallest fractional energy that a crystal can have and still contribute to the position measurement. Its default value, obtained after optimization studies, is 4.2 — so that crystals in the cluster containing more than 1.5% of the cluster energy contribute to the position measurement. CMS Note 2001/034

Calculate Method in CMSSW Firstly , get the depth from A[B+log(E)] . Max. energy deposit crystal: (θ,φ) & (x,y,z) getPosition(depth) For each crystal, Then using the log weighting technique: Then

Parameters in CMSSW Depth A[B+log(E)] : A=0.89cm Weight W0=4.2 Refs.: For electron B= For photon B= Weight W0=4.2 Refs.: http://cmslxr.fnal.gov/lxr/source/RecoEcal/EgammaClusterProducers/data/islandBasicClusters.cfi http://cmslxr.fnal.gov/lxr/source/RecoEcal/EgammaClusterProducers/data/hybridSuperClusters.cfi http://cmslxr.fnal.gov/lxr/source/RecoEgamma/EgammaPhotonProducers/data/photons.cfi 7.4 Barrel 3.1 Endcap_no_Preshower 1.2 Endcap_with_Preshowe 7.7 Barrel 6.3 Endcap_no_Preshower 3.6 Endcap_with_Preshowe

Empirical formula to parameterize EM shower shape We combine the longitudinal profile and lateral profile of EM shower to get the empirical 3-dimentional formula. The longitudinal profile of EM shower can be well described by a Gamma-function: where t is the shower depth. E0 is the Energy. a and b are parameters The following formula is used to describe the lateral profile: where r is the distance of a crystal to the COG (centre of gravity), and R is a parameter. The longitudinal profile is validated from the CMS Geant4 simulation. For the whole empirical formula (Longitudinal + Lateral), we use the data of ECAL test beam 2006 for validation.

EM Showers -- Longitudinal profile Determine longitudinal profile from CMS Geant4 Simulation Simulation sample in SW167 Using “EcalSimHitsValidProducer” in the CMSSW/Validation package 2000 events/sample to see the average distribution 20GeV Electron longitudinal profile fitted by the Gamma-function 20GeV Gamma longitudinal profile fiteed by the Gamma-function Eta=0.1 & Phi=0.1

Parametric EM shower fitting method Same as the analysis in CMSSW_1_6_7 Formulea: longitudinal profile + lateral profile Determine longitudinal profile from CMS Geant4 Simulation: parameters a & b For the Gamma EM shower with B-on, the energy spreading is, to good approximation, only in the -direction. Non isotropy at the same r of the lateral formula in a layer now. Correction: The original COG obtained by the energy Log-weighted method is split into 2 new COG points; 2 interaction points with a layer are obtained; In a layer, the energy in a crystal is obtained from the average effect of the lateral formula originated at the 2 interaction points. For the EM shower fitting method , 6 variables were used in TMVA analysis: A、 ΔE/Edep5x5 where ΔE=E0-Edep5x5、、1、2、 2/Edep5x5 instead of 2 (in SW167).