Status report Minjung Kim 20140116.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

EEMC Calibration in 2004 MIP signature w/ SMD Absolute gains for SMD, pre/post-shower, towers HV setup scheme for 2005 running Jan Balewski, IUCF Joint.

Advertisements

2 Introduction   MiniCal test-beam studies started at the beginning of March (till March 6 we only had 17 APD’s, then 33 APD’s)   A few days were.

Adil Khan Kyungpook National university Korea-Japan Joint ScECAL Group Meeting kobe University Japan 3 rd September 2010.

AHCAL Saturation Study CALICE week – Casablanca, Morocco 2010/09/22 Jaroslav Zalesak Institute of Physics, Prague / DESY Study of single SiPM response.

PHENIX local RUN9 RHIC meeting Manabu Togawa for the PHENIX 1.

1 STAR TOF Calibration. 2 Detectors TPC(TPX) - tracking MRPC TOF (TOFr) – stop time measurement pVPD/upVPD - start time measurement Particle momentum;

1 Measurement of the single transverse- spin asymmetry of forward neutrons in p-p collisions at RHIC-PHENIX Manabu Togawa for the PHENIX collaboration.

Preshower 15/03/2005 P.Kokkas Preshower September Run Data Analysis P. Kokkas.

EH1 (AD 1&2, IWS, OWS) PMT Jul. 30 – Aug. 20 RollingGain Calibration Summary Zhe Wang (BNL) and Qing He (Princeton) Aug. 22, 2011.

Study of Photon Sensors using the Laser System 05/7/12 Niigata University, Japan Sayaka Iba, Editha P. Jacosalem, Hiroaki Ono, Noriko.

Some answers to the questions/comments at the Heavy/Light presentation of March 17, Outline : 1) Addition of the id quadrant cut (slides 2-3); 2)

GLAST LAT Project Instrument Analysis Workshop 5 – 05/08/29 F. Piron & E. Nuss (IN2P3/LPTA – Montpellier) 1 Comprehensive review of CAL calibrations Gamma-ray.

Veto Wall Test Hyupwoo Lee MINERvA/Jupiter Group Meeting July 18, 2007.

Veto Wall Test Hyupwoo Lee MINERvA/Jupiter Group Meeting Apr, 16, 2008.

FMS review, Sep FPD/FMS: calibrations and offline reconstruction Measurements of inclusive  0 production Reconstruction algorithm - clustering.

K1.8 meeting Report from E05 group Toshiyuki Gogami 26 Dec 2014.

Tests with JT0623 & JT0947 at Indiana University Nagoya PMT database test results for JT0623 at 3220V: This tube has somewhat higher than usual gain. 5×10.

14/02/2007 Paolo Walter Cattaneo 1 1.Trigger analysis 2.Muon rate 3.Q distribution 4.Baseline 5.Pulse shape 6.Z measurement 7.Att measurement OUTLINE.

Saturation in V-calib LED scans CALICE AHCAL – Main Meeting 2010/07/05 Jaroslav Zalesak analysis still in progress but gives global results FNAL & CERN.

S-2S MEMO Toshiyuki Gogami 17 May Contents Analysis results of WC test.

SLAC, HiRes T-461: “FLASH” part 1 Justin Findlay.

A N DY Status Commissioning with colliding beams (p  +p  at  s=500 GeV) L.C.Bland, for AnDY 8 March 2011 Time Meeting, BNL.

Montpellier, November 15, 2003 J. Cvach, TileHCAL and APD readout1 TileHCAL- fibre readout by APD APDs and preamplifiers Energy scan with DESY beam –Energy.

PHENIX Local Polarimeter PSTP 2007 at BNL September 11, 2007 Yuji Goto (RIKEN/RBRC)

Two-stage amplifier status test buffer – to be replaced with IRSX i signal recent / final (hopefully) design uses load resistor and voltage gain stage.

STAR Collaboration Meeting, BNL, Feb 2005 Alexandre A. P. Suaide University of Sao Paulo Slide 1 BEMC software update L3 display 200 GeV February.

Development of TOP counter for Super B factory K. Inami (Nagoya university) 2007/10/ th International Workshop on Ring Imaging Cherenkov Counters.

Mitglied der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft Calibration of the COSY-TOF STT & pp Elastic Analysis Sedigheh Jowzaee IKP Group Talk 11 July 2013.

Forward Pixel Beamtest Analysis Carsten Rott Purdue University Januar 24, 2001.

CALICE Tungsten HCAL Prototype status Erika Garutti Wolfgang Klempt Erik van der Kraaij CERN LCD International Workshop on Linear Colliders 2010, October.

DESY BT analysis - MPPC Saturation Correction - S. Uozumi Feb Sci-ECAL meeting 1.MPPC Gain Measurement (with LED data) 2.Inter-calibration of readout.

5-9 June 2006Erika Garutti - CALOR CALICE scintillator HCAL commissioning experience and test beam program Erika Garutti On behalf of the CALICE.

STAR Collaboration Meeting, BNL – march 2003 Alexandre A. P. Suaide Wayne State University Slide 1 EMC Update Update on EMC –Hardware installed and current.

Search for High-Mass Resonances in e + e - Jia Liu Madelyne Greene, Lana Muniz, Jane Nachtman Goal for the summer Searching for new particle Z’ --- a massive.

Some feedbacks from DRS data analysis (very preliminary) F. Scuri - I.N.F.N Sezione di Pisa RD52 – Collaboration Meeting – Pavia, March 12, 2013 F. Scuri.

FIRST RESULTS OF THE SILICON STRIP DETECTOR at STAR Jörg Reinnarth, Jonathan Bouchet, Lilian Martin, Jerome Baudot and the SSD teams in Nantes and Strasbourg.

Muons at CalDet Introduction Track Finder Package ADC Corrections Drift Points Path Length Attenuation Strip-to-Strip Calibration Scintillator Response.

Pedestal Stability and Sparsification Nick Woods UNCW July 29, 2005.

1 EMCAL Reconstruction in Pass pp 900 GeV 29/03/2010 Gustavo Conesa Balbastre.

Development of a pad interpolation algorithm using charge-sharing.

DREAM Coll. Meeting, Rome 2009F. Bedeschi, INFN-Pisa Template Analysis of DRS Data  Motivations  Preliminary results F. Bedeschi, R. Carosi, M. Incagli,

G. Eigen, Paris, Introduction The SiPM response is non-linear and depends on operating voltage (V-V bd ) and temperature  SiPMs need monitoring.

CALICE, CERN June 29, 2004J. Zálešák, APDs for tileHCAL1 APDs for tileHCAL MiniCal studies with APDs in e-test beam J. Zálešák, Prague with different preamplifiers.

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.

Inclusive cross section and single transverse-spin asymmetry of very forward neutron production at PHENIX Spin2012 in Dubna September 17 th, 2012 Yuji.

Report on the Beam Test Analysis Satoru Uozumi Apr GLDCAL meeting Topics of this talk are: Comparison of various MIP calibration methods Some problems.

20 April 2007MICE Tracker Phone Meeting1 Analysis of cosmic/self-triggerd data of station 5 Hideyuki Sakamoto MICE Tracker Phone Meeting 20 th April 2007.

DESY BT analysis - updates - S. Uozumi Dec-12 th 2011 ScECAL meeting.

Feb C.Smith UVA EC energy calibration – g13 pass0 For pass0 data were cooked with CALDB calibration constants reset to nominal 10 channels / MeV.

The dynamic range extension system for the LHAASO-WCDA experiment

Analysis of LumiCal data from the 2010 testbeam

PreShower Characterisations

EZDC spectra reconstruction and calibration

Directed flow of identified particles from Au+Au Collisions at RHIC

Solving pedestal problem

PSD Front-End-Electronics A.Ivashkin, V.Marin (INR, Moscow)

HERD Prototype Beam Test

Bonn Test Station data analysis with PandaRoot

Pulse Shape Fitting Beam Test September, October CERN

Status of the TOF Detector

The Silicon Track Trigger (STT) at DØ

FFT analysis Goal : Energy calibration ( systematic error estimation)

Yuxi Pan University of California, Los Angeles

2006 Relative Luminosity Tai Sakuma MIT 3/19/2007.

Kazuya Aoki For the PHENIX Collaborations. Kyoto Univ. / RIKEN

Effective energy: which analyses in ALICE?

Current status Minjung Kim.

Current status Minjung Kim

p0 ALL analysis in PHENIX

CAL crosstalk issues and their implications

Presentation transcript:

Status report Minjung Kim 20140116

Calibration SMD/ZDC calibration parameters: I had used calibration parameters from database (pedestal: “ZdcCalib.pedestal.Fri_Feb_1_00:00:00_2013-Wed_Jan_1_00:00:00_2020”, gain: “ZdcCalib.adc.Fri_Feb_1_00:00:00_2013- Wed_Jan_1_00:00:00_2020”) Seems not correct : pedestal not match with data & DB parameters, energy distribution peak (x_F~0.8) is lower than it should be) Compared pedestal value got from several ways. From DB From LED run (various fitting ranges) From Physics run

Pedestal calibration with LED run -X-axis: ZDC ADC digital sum (sum of 3 ZDC module’s ADC) -Y-axis: each ZDC ADC, or SMD ADC (ADC value: average) -Fit “[0]*x+[1]” -> [1]: pedestal -but not linear in some channels (All channel results are in backup slide)

Pedestal calibration with physics data Get constants from ADC distribution of physics run data ZDC: Fit “gaus” (SetRange(peak bin-5, peak bin+5); SetParameters(peak bin entry, peak bin, 1.);) ->pedestal: Mean SMD: Events with zdc adc 550~1000 ( to avoid strange SMD peak) Fit “Landau” (fit thicker right tail better than gaus) (SetRange: peak bin-50, peak bin+50) SetParameters(peak bin-1, peak bin, 6.0) ) ->pedestal: MPV SMD peak which is not pedestal

Colors in fit result Red: fitting results with physics run (385985, transverse run) Green: LED run with fit range 250 ~ 2250, or 250 ~3000 (range in calibration macro https://www.phenix.bnl.gov/viewvc/viewvc.cgi/phenix/offline/packages/ zdc/calibrations/adcgain.cc?view=markup ) Blue: LED run with fit range 550 ~ 1000 Yellow: DataBase (old, taken at 2011, SMD board replacement at 2012) -> For SMD, red & yellow values are very close except some channels

ZDC pedestal fit

ZDC pedestal fit -zoom

SMD ch 0~7

SMD ch 0~7 zoom

SMD ch 8~15

SMD ch 8~15 zoom

SMD ch 16~23

SMD ch 16~23 zoom Red bar is almost in the yellow bar’s position(see the table in the first back up slide)

SMD ch 24~31

SMD ch 24~31 zoom

ZDC gain constant ZDC ADC distribution after < neutron ID && r<1cm (=p_T <0.11*x_F GeV/c) > cut. Cuts about SMD, (position, # scintillators, badsmd): used SMD results with calibrated by DB parameters. Peak: x_F~0.8 -> peak ADC should be 204 GeV Peak ADC: got peak bin’s middle value Gain=204/ (peak ADC - pedestal) But, those are tentative gain. The reason for doing ZDC calibration is to see if ZDC’s ADC range for SMD calibration is containing energy range for analysis) Max ADC for analysis (300GeV) = (300/204) * (peak ADC –pedestal) + ped ->Max ADC shift: peak shifted* 1.5

Result north south south north Pedestal ADC value 467.2 438.6 Peak ADC value 690 750 Gain 0.958647 0.676841 550 ADC in GeV (ene min) 79.4 GeV 75.4 GeV 300 GeV in ADC (ene max) 780.1 881.8

Results & things to do SMD pedestal, ZDC pedestal, ZDC gain -> going to use physics run fitting data Should think about how to get SMD gain

backup

Parameters of each method physics run DB LED (250~2250) LED (250~3000) LED (550~1000) channel pedestal err ZDC 0 467.2 1.4 430 1.2 425.8 1.06 429.7 0.88 413.1 4.85 ZDC 1 430.5 1.5 397 368.4 0.95 369.2 0.81 361.3 4.55 ZDC 2 394 1.6 396 393.5 0.89 397.2 0.75 372.3 4.37 ZDC 3 464.7 456 435 0.84 437 0.71 421.7 4 ZDC 4 438.6 1.7 417 407.4 0.91 407.2 0.76 398.4 4.23 ZDC 5 436.2 386 1.3 368 0.9 366.7 366.9 4.06 ZDC 6 444.5 2 431 410.5 0.87 413.2 0.72 414.5 3.84 ZDC 7 425.7 429 409.5 0.94 414.4 0.77 417.1 4.31 SMD 0 447.3 5.6 449.3 6.6 450.2 3.63 448.9 2.96 426.6 18.22 SMD 1 661.7 5.9 664.9 7.7 659.2 3.82 663.2 3.05 712.9 21.37 SMD 2 517.9 5.8 519.9 6.8 417.8 3.67 429.1 2.99 22.73 SMD 3 707.4 5.7 712.1 7.1 687.6 3.73 705.7 666.1 20.92 SMD 4 695.6 6 691 731 3.27 722.7 2.66 952.9 16.18 SMD 5 434.6 432.8 6.4 388.6 3.29 402.1 2.68 156.4 16.62 SMD 6 655.8 658 6.3 650.1 3.11 663.3 2.5 674.4 15.48 SMD 7 673.6 682.9 676.5 3.18 689.4 2.53 768.4 17.22 SMD 8 430.2 6.1 429.4 6.9 434.4 3.57 425.2 2.86 397.9 17.37 SMD 9 568.8 5.5 567.3 6.7 582.1 565.5 2.3 577.6 15.51 SMD 10 499.7 500 6.5 496.2 3.34 468.1 2.79 500.7 19.66 SMD 11 695.9 697.8 7.5 641.4 3.71 666.8 2.95 677.8 22.53 SMD 12 562.8 5.3 564.3 566.8 3.36 588.2 2.77 562.4 19.19 SMD 13 578.2 576.9 558.9 3.28 492.1 2.6 521 16.3 SMD 14 722.5 721.1 7.2 714 3.3 752.1 2.63 758.8 17.76 SMD 15 614.5 13.2 608.4 6.2 602.8 4.18 646 3.35 569.4 21.57 SMD 16 716.5 761 10 777.6 1.86 776.2 1.68 623.3 15.24 SMD 17 517.1 517.4 464.3 2.21 667.2 1.85 495.9 14.76 SMD 18 856.5 856.3 7.4 713.4 773.8 1.45 844.4 13.54 SMD 19 820 769 8 542 1.8 671.5 1.51 684.6 16.32 SMD 20 727.6 728 626.6 1.67 644.9 1.52 476.8 16.8 SMD 21 789.5 794 700.9 1.71 762.3 1.43 804.5 15.93 SMD 22 792.3 793.3 8.6 580.1 1.55 1.32 687.9 15.5 SMD 23 848.3 848.6 610.8 1.54 698.5 693.9 15.73 SMD 24 530.3 523.5 554.6 2.12 552.1 1.88 486.3 15.19 SMD 25 573.9 569.9 655.1 1.65 644.5 1.46 633 14.08 SMD 26 676.7 674.1 646.8 2.28 1.93 627.4 15.1 SMD 27 640 637.6 7 2.19 606.9 557.4 15.7 SMD 28 427 5.1 639.3 1.61 612.4 422 16.6 SMD 29 748.3 744 7.3 558.2 1.56 638.2 1.31 666.6 14.26 SMD 30 773.5 770.3 5 601.2 666.5 657.1 14.95 SMD 31 716 13.1 705.2 574.1 653.7 578.5 15.49

ZDC energy distribution with DB calibration parameters -x axis: GeV -Should have peak around 200 GeV (r<1 cm), bu t smaller in north -But asymmetry will not change with same ZDC ADC cut-> ZDC calibration can be done later.

Neutron ID && r<1 cm Cut i=0 for south, 4 for north cond <<"trigscaled==8 && " <<"trigscaled_lpol==1 && " <<"spin>=0 && spin<=3 && " <<"zdc_time["<<4*i<<"] >-100 && " <<"badsmd["<<i<<"]==0 && " <<"wxpos["<<i<<"]>=2 && wypos["<<i<<"]>=2 && " <<"(xpos["<<i<<"] - ("<<x0<<"))*(xpos["<<i<<"] - ("<<x0<<")) + (ypos["<<i<<"] - ("<<y0<<"))*(ypos["<<i<<"] - ("<<y0<<")) <1.0";

ZDC results - LED

SMD results (1) -LED Not linear.

SMD results (2) -LED Not linear.

SMD results (3) -LED Not linear.

SMD results (4) -LED Not linear.

SMD Gain constant SMD gain: relative gain (cannot gives absolute energy) ->so relative gain is enough Changed into log scale (y axis is not log scale Because I applied log function to each bin content, then fill histogram) Tried linear fit Hit position is calculated as n: # of SMD strip having hit

SMD Gain linear fit (1)

SMD Gain linear fit (2)

SMD Gain linear fit (3)

SMD Gain linear fit (4)

Summary for ZDC/SMD correlation Manabu Togawa

Block diagram for SMD readout Dinode readout *1 (sum) Inverter Anode read out *15 IP Area (BB crate) Tunnel Area Each SMD signal is input to the SMD FEM directly from anode readout. Sum is read from dinode via inverter. Multi. CH PMT (HAMAMATSU H6568 M16) Common gate making by ZDC sum. See next page.

Making gate signals for SMD (ZDC sum signal is split by FIFO) (LeCroy 428F) LINEAR

The ZDC/SMD correlation SMD pedestal and gain look changing in the specific ZDC ch arge input. Worse the years (RUNs) (6p) There is correlation among 4 channel. (7p) 1 group shared the gate signal. Only at beam time (8-9p) Can not reproduce by LED data

ZDC/SMD correlation SMD pedestal and gain look changing in the sp ecific ZDC charge input. Some channels Qscan result is also has bump. Usual pedestal Line (From Qscan result) qscan result.