Update: Run1 vs Run2 CC inc & First look at Water-out/Water-in Erez Reinherz-Aronis and Rajarshi Das (w/ Walter Toki) May 9, 2011 1.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Update on Data / MC Comparisons for Low Hadronic Energy CC-like Events Reminder of problem Fiducial studies with more MC statistics Effect of offset in.

Advertisements

Neutrinos from kaon decay in MiniBooNE Kendall Mahn Columbia University MiniBooNE beamline overview Kaon flux predictions Kaon measurements in MiniBooNE.

1 Search for the Flavor-Changing Neutral-Current Decay,   → p     HyangKyu Park University of Michigan, Ann Arbor for the HyperCP collaboration.

HBD studies in Run9 200GeV p+p collisions Jiayin Sun 1.

MINERvA Overview MINERvA is studying neutrino interactions in unprecedented detail on a variety of different nuclei Low Energy (LE) Beam Goals: – Study.

Measurement of the absolute BR(K  +  -  + ) : an update Patrizia de Simone KLOE Kaon meeting – 21 May 2009.

Low beam intensity (MERIT beam spot size – part II) Goran Skoro 30 June 2008.

Positron Asymmetry and Polarization from the E166 September 2005 run Gideon Alexander, Erez Reinherz-Aronis.

1 A preliminary estimate of the beam e ’s from antineutrinos David Jaffe, Pedro Ochoa December 7 th 2006.

1 N. Davidson E/p single hadron energy scale check with minimum bias events Jet Note 8 Meeting 15 th May 2007.

Selection: i) Used “basic cuts” described in my NuBarPID talk (slide 3). 74.4% of CC events pass this cut. ii) Used David’s PID cut at -0.2 to remove NC.

MINOS 1 Beam e ’s from antineutrinos David Jaffe and Pedro Ochoa September 27 th 2007  Preliminaries  Data & MC  Expected sensitivities  Preliminary.

Beam profile vs time Analyzed Vx vs Vy distributions vs time for –Run 72 (13:26:02 – 28:25) –Run 73 (13:36:10 – 13:37:30) –Run 74 (43:12 – 44:21) Binned.

Exclusive D s Semileptonic decays using kinematic fitting.

© 2007 by S - Squared, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

PPR meeting - January 23, 2003 Andrea Dainese 1 TPC tracking parameterization: a useful tool for simulation studies with large statistics Motivation Implementation.

P. Vahle, Fermilab Oct An Alternate Approach to the CC Measurement— Predicting the FD Spectrum Patricia Vahle University College London Fermilab.

Preliminary Study of CC-Inclusive Events in the P0D using Global Reconstruction Rajarshi Das (w/ Walter Toki) Nu-Mu Prelim. Meeting Dec 2010 CSU.

Exclusive π 0 electroproduction in the resonance region. Nikolay Markov, Maurizio Ungaro, Kyungseon Joo University of Connecticut Hadron spectroscopy meeting.

Special Cases of Factoring Chapter 5.5 Perfect Square Trinomials a 2 + 2ab + b 2 (a + b) 2 = a 2 – 2ab + b 2 (a – b) 2 =

1 Cosmic Muon Analysis: Current Status Stuart Mufson, Brian Rebel Argonne March 18, 2005.

Preliminary Results from the MINER A Experiment Deborah Harris Fermilab on behalf of the MINERvA Collaboration.

Updates on the P0D reconstruction

UC Davis June st Rosi Reed Low Energy Test Run Results Rosi Reed University of California at Davis.

AIHENP-99 Momentum Reconstruction of Particles...1 Momentum Reconstruction of Particles in the Forward Muon Trigger System of the ATLAS Detector Gideon.

First Look at Data and MC Comparisons for Cedar and Birch ● Comparisons of physics quantities for CC events with permutations of Cedar, Birch, Data and.

 0  5  Outline Event selection & analysis Background rejection Efficiencies Mass spectrum Comparison data-MC Branching ratio evaluation Systematics.

Hadron production in C+C at 1 and 2 A GeV analysis of data from experiments NOV02 and AUG04 for high resolution tracking (Runge-Kutta tracks) Pavel Tlustý,

N. Saoulidou, Fermilab, MINOS Collaboration Meeting N. Saoulidou, Fermilab, ND/CC Parallel Session, MINOS Collaboration Meeting R1.18.

Cedar and pre-Daikon Validation ● CC PID parameter based CC sample selections with Birch, Cedar, Carrot and pre-Daikon. ● Cedar validation for use with.

P. Vahle, Oxford Jan F/N Ratio and the Effect of Systematics on the 1e20 POT CC Analysis J. Thomas, P. Vahle University College London Feburary.

Muon absolute flux measurement in anti-neutrino mode A.Ariga 1, C. Pistillo 1, S. Aoki 2 1 University of Bern, 2 Kobe University.

Beam Extrapolation Fit Peter Litchfield  An update on the method I described at the September meeting  Objective;  To fit all data, nc and cc combined,

Mark Dorman UCL/RAL MINOS Collaboration Meeting Fermilab, Oct. 05 Data/MC Comparisons and Estimating the ND Flux with QE Events ● Update on QE event selection.

Study of the ND Data/MC for the CC analysis October 14, 2005 MINOS collaboration meeting M.Ishitsuka Indiana University.

Measurement of the Charge Ratio of Cosmic Muons using CMS Data M. Aldaya, P. García-Abia (CIEMAT-Madrid) On behalf of the CMS Collaboration Sector 10 Sector.

AA->HH Study AA->4b analysis & (preliminary) Summary Shin-ichi Kawada (AdSM, Hiroshima University) 22nd General KEK (2011/9/3)1.

T2K muon measurement 2014 Momentum module A.Ariga, C. Pistillo University of Bern S. Aoki Kobe University 1.

MKI failure event 17-April-11 Recall from logbook: MKI D (1st one seen by the beam) had a real flashover between the two sets of 36b during the 3rd 72b.

T2K Status Report. The Accelerator Complex a Beamline Performance 3 First T2K run completed January to June x protons accumulated.

April 26, McGrew 1 Goals of the Near Detector Complex at T2K Clark McGrew Stony Brook University Road Map The Requirements The Technique.

P0D Reconstruction Systematic Error Estimation Norm Buchanan, David Connick, Eric Conrad, Fahmida Khanam.

Diffraction at DØ Andrew Brandt University of Texas at Arlington E   Run IRun II Low-x Workshop June 6, 2003 Nafplion, Greece.

1 A study to clarify important systematic errors A.K.Ichikawa, Kyoto univ. We have just started not to be in a time blind with construction works. Activity.

MINOS Coll Meet. Oxford, Jan CC/NC Data Cross Checks Thomas Osiecki University of Texas at Austin.

P. Ochoa, September Using Muon Removed files to assess the purity of the nubar-PID selection Pedro Ochoa MINOS Collaboration Meeting September 2006.

Inclusive charm cross-section and charm hadrons production fractions F. Di Capua.

Hadron production in C+C at 1 and 2 A GeV analysis of data from experiments NOV02 and AUG04 for high resolution tracking (Runge-Kutta tracks) Pavel Tlustý,

Beam direction and flux measured by MUMON K. Matsuoka (Kyoto) for the MUMON group Contents: 1.Horn focusing effect 2.Beam stability (direction/flux) 3.Beam.

Paolo Massarotti Kaon meeting March 2007  ±  X    X  Time measurement use neutral vertex only in order to obtain a completely independent.

Hadron production in C+C at 2 A GeV measured by the HADES spectrometer Nov02 gen3 analysis and results for spline tracks (shown in Dubna) changes - removing.

Photon Selection Algorithm Ming Yang ， Mingshui Chen BESIII Meeting

T2K Experiment Results & Prospects Alfons Weber University of Oxford & STFC/RAL For the T2K Collaboration.

FP-CCD GLD VERTEX GROUP Presenting by Tadashi Nagamine Tohoku University ILC VTX Ringberg Castle, May 2006.

Recent Results from the T2K ND280 detector Jonathan Perkin on behalf of the T2K collaboration KAMIOKA TOKAI 295 km.

MINERνA Overview  MINERνA is studying neutrino interactions in unprecedented detail on a variety of different nuclei  Low Energy (LE) Beam Goals: t Study.

Update on Track Efficiency Fitting using Kshorts 17. May 2010 Till Eifert, Grant Gorfine.

Feasibility of the detection of D 0 mesons in the NA61/SHINE experiment: Vertex detector for NA61/SHINE P. Staszel and Yasir Ali Jagiellonian University.

T. Ariga AEC-LHEP, University of Bern

Electroweak Physics Towards the CDR

Electroweak Physics Towards the CDR

P0D reconstruction/analysis update

Muon stopping target optimization

Checks of TOF Fiducial Cuts

fKK analysis in Run3 d+Au collisions: Update

Charged Particle Multiplicity in DIS

Charged Particle Multiplicity in DIS

TOF Fiducial Cut on 325 +/- 25 MeV/c (++ Field)

T2K Run8 MUMON Summary.

Understanding of the E391a Detector using KL decay

Presentation transcript:

Update: Run1 vs Run2 CC inc & First look at Water-out/Water-in Erez Reinherz-Aronis and Rajarshi Das (w/ Walter Toki) May 9,

Outlook Samples and POTs Bunch structure Run1 vs Run2  Run 1: Data vs MCp4  Run 2: Data vs MCp4  MCp4: Run1 vs Run2  Data: Run1vs Run2 Water-out/Water-in  Data: Ratio Water-out/Water-in vs expectation 2

(from files header) TotalDQMCp4 Run1 water3.09x x x10 20 Run2 water6.98x x x10 20 Sum1.00x x x10 20 Samples and POTs 3 DQ sample were used CC Inclusive Selection:  Highest momentum negative charge track in a bunch  Begins in the P0D  (no TPC pulls cut)

Bunch timing 4 Run1: Run 31 → 34 Run 36 Run2: Run 37→38 Run2 has Double-Triple bunch structure 1 st = Run36; 2 nd, 3 rd = Run37/8 Run 2 Run 1

Run1 vs Run2 Run 1: Data vs MCp4 Run 2: Data vs MCp4 MCp4: Run1 vs Run2 Data: Run1vs Run2 5

Run1 Data vs MCp4 CC inc - X, Y, Cosθ, φ 6 Normalized by POT

Run1 Data vs MCp4 Z, Neg Trk Momentum 7 Normalized by POT Start position of Highest momentum Neg. Trk in the P0D The dashed lines represent the water-target limits

Run2 Data vs MCp4 CC inc - X, Y, Cosθ, φ 8 Normalized by POT

Run2 Data vs MCp4 Z, Neg Trk Momentum 9 Normalized by POT Data/MCp4 = 8273/8521 = 0.97±0.02

MCp4 Run1 vs Run2 CC inc - X, Y, Cosθ, φ 10 Run1 water Run2 water Normalized by POT

Mcp4 Run1 vs Run2 Z, Neg Trk Momentum 11 Normalized by POT Run1/Run2 = / = 1.030±0.004 usEcalusWTcWTcEcal Run1/Run Stat. Error

Data Run1 vs Run2 CC inc - X, Y, Cosθ, φ 12 Run1 water Run2 water Normalized by POT

Data Run1 vs Run2 Z, Neg Trk Momentum 13 Normalized by POT Run1/Run2 = 6062/5673 = 1.07±0.02 usEcalusWTcWTcEcal Run1/Run Stat. Error

Z distribution checks: XY 14 X Beam position and direction Run1 water Run2 water Normalized by POT

Water-out/Water-in Data ratio vs expectation 15

(from files header) TotalDQ Run1 water3.09x x10 19 Run2 water6.98x x10 19 Sum1.00x x10 19 Run2 air1.79x x10 19 Samples and POTs 16 DQ sample were used

Data CC inc: X, Y, Cosθ, φ 17 Run1 Run2 water Run2 air Normalized by POT

Data CC inc: Neg Trk Momentum 18 Run1 Run2 water Run2 air Normalized by POT Note: Run2 air is reconstructed as water No TPC pull used

Z position distributions 19 Start position of Highest momentum Neg. Trk in the P0D The dashed lines represent the water-target limits Run13588 Run2 water3358 Run2 air2573 Run1/Run2 = 1.07±0.02

Water-out/Water-in ratio 20 Water-target measured ration 0.70±0.02 Expected ration from material list: 0.68 Dashed lines are the water-target limits 0.94± ± ±0.05

Summary Run1 vs Run 2:  MCp4 Run1/Run2 ~3% higher  Data Run1/Run2 ~7% higher  Maybe there is some Z difference (within limit stat.) Water-out/Water-in ratio measured 70 ± 2 % (expect 68 %) Future plans:  Data/MC ratio vs P0Dules  MCp4 – study TPC pulls 21

Update: Run1 vs Run2 CC inc & First look at Water-out/Water-in Erez Reinherz-Aronis and Rajarshi Das (w/ Walter Toki) May 9,

Backup (General) ND280 Fiducial < X < 1008 [mm] < Y < 1110 [mm] < Z < 5000 [mm] P0D Fiducial < X < 995 [mm] < Y < 1100 [mm] < Z < -980 [mm] 23