Secondary beam analysis – PS and SPS Started May 22, 2012.

Slides:



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

Status of DHCAL Slice Test Data Analysis Lei Xia ANL-HEP All results preliminary.
Electromagnetic shower in the AHCAL selection criteria data / MonteCarlo comparison of: handling linearity shower shapes CALICE collaboration meeting may.
CALICE WHCAL testbeam at SPS H8 27 sep – 03 oct: 6 days for energies up to 180 GeV (+ polarity)
Simulation of the RPC Response José Repond Argonne National Laboratory CALICE Collaboration Meeting University Hassan II Casablanca, Morocco September.
First analysis of DHCAL Data José Repond Argonne National Laboratory Linear Collider Workshop LCWS 2012 October 22 – 26, 2012 University of Texas at Arlington,
F ERMILAB T EST B EAM F ACILITY Aria Soha March 17, 2011.
Exclusive D s Semileptonic decays using kinematic fitting.
A first look at the digital approach Vishnu V. Zutshi NIU/NICADD.
CSC Note Jet 8 Meeting – April 11 '07 Status and plan for single hadron scale check with minimum bias events N. Davidson The University of Melbourne.
Exclusive D s Semileptonic decays using kinematic fitting.
Anne-Marie Magnan Imperial College London CALICE Si-W EM calorimeter Preliminary Results of the testbeams st part On behalf of the CALICE Collaboration.
More on Testbeam Analysis FLZ. Stability Checks for TCMT Pedestal stability already shown by Kurt MIP calibration stability Response stability.
Thursday, November 7th ECFA meeting - Valencia - A.-M. Magnan 1 CALICE Summary of 2006 testbeam for the ECAL Anne-Marie MAGNAN Imperial College London.
Muon analysis – PS and SPS data Started May 21, 2012.
Evaluation of G4 Releases in CMS (Sub-detector Studies) Software used Electrons in Tracker Photons in the Electromagnetic Calorimeter Pions in the Calorimeter.
Update on Ongoing Tungsten Digital HCAL Beam Tests Erik van der Kraaij CERN LCD.
LCG Meeting, May 14th 2003 V. Daniel Elvira1 G4 (OSCAR_1_4_0) Validation of CMS HCal V. Daniel Elvira Fermilab.
ScECAL Fermilab Beam Test analysis ScECAL Group Meeting Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Republic of Korea, August 6 th, 2010 Adil Khan, Satoru Uozumi,
Implementing a dual readout calorimeter in SLIC and testing Geant4 Physics Hans Wenzel Fermilab Friday, 2 nd October 2009 ALCPG 2009.
Jiawen Zhang, IHEP, 2008, April 10, frascati Status of BEPCII/BESIII and Physics preparation Jiawen Zhang 2008/4/7—10 , PHIPSI08, Frascati.
Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Page 1 EC / PCAL ENERGY CALIBRATION Cole Smith UVA PCAL EC Outline Why 2 calorimeters? Requirements Using.
The Scintillator ECAL Beam Test at FNAL K. Kotera, Shinshu-u, 1st October 2009 CALICE Scintillator ECAL group; Kobe University, Kyungpook University, the.
Tests of a Digital Hadron Calorimeter José Repond Argonne National Laboratory CALICE Collaboration Meeting March 10 – 12, 2010 University of Texas at Arlington.
Fermilab Test Beam Facility Aria Meyhoefer (soon to be Soha) May 10, 2010.
Event Reconstruction in SiD02 with a Dual Readout Calorimeter Detector Geometry EM Calibration Cerenkov/Scintillator Correction Jet Reconstruction Performance.
Muon Identification in the MINOS Calibration Detector Anna Holin 05 December 2005 University College London.
CALICE Digital Hadron Calorimeter: Calibration and Response to Pions and Positrons International Workshop on Future Linear Colliders LCWS 2013 November.
January 21, 2007Suvadeep Bose / IndiaCMS - Santiniketan 1 Response of CMS Hadron Calorimeter to Electron Beams Suvadeep Bose EHEP, TIFR, Mumbai Outline:
The DHCAL Data Analysis José Repond CALICE Meeting, Prague, September 10 – 12, 2007.
F ERMILAB T EST B EAM F ACILITY Aria Soha March 22, 2011.
Feb. 7, 2007First GLAST symposium1 Measuring the PSF and the energy resolution with the GLAST-LAT Calibration Unit Ph. Bruel on behalf of the beam test.
SDHCAL I.Laktineh TB strategy The PS TB was indented to validate the whole system (including the DAQ) and to select the right thresholds values.
W-DHCAL Analysis Overview José Repond Argonne National Laboratory.
E. GaruttiCALICE collaboration meeting, Prague CERN Test beam (part II) Erika Garutti, Fabrizio Salvatore.
Interactions of hadrons in the SiW ECAL Towards paper Naomi van der Kolk.
Developing Imaging Calorimeters for a SiD-Flavor Lepton Collider Jacob Smith Linear Collider Physics School Ambleside,England 2009.
Calo preparation for 2015 Goals: -Trigger stability -Good calibration for HLT2 processing -Improved calibration ( timing, e/gamma response) for all calo.
The experimental setup of Test Beam HE EE ES BEAM  A slice of the CMS calorimter was tested during summer of 2007 at the H2 test beam area at CERN with.
Min-DHCAL: Measurements with Pions Benjamin Freund and José Repond Argonne National Laboratory CALICE Collaboration Meeting Max-Planck-Institute, Munich.
Nantes — 2008, July Analysis of results from EmCal beam test at CERN PS (and SPS) energies P. La Rocca & F. Riggi University & INFN Catania University.
Reconstructing energy from HERD beam test data Zheng QUAN IHEP 3 rd HERD work shop Xi’an, 20 Jan
1 GLAST LAT Project CalSoft Face-to-Face Meeting April 15 – 16, 2004 Benoît Lott GSI Analysis Status Degrader 58 Ni Beam Fragments Target EM miniCAL GSI’s.
LHCf Detectors Sampling Calorimeter W 44 r.l, 1.6λ I Scintilator x 16 Layers Position Detector Scifi x 4 (Arm#1) Scilicon Tracker x 4(Arm#2) Detector size.
Muons at CalDet Introduction Track Finder Package ADC Corrections Drift Points Path Length Attenuation Strip-to-Strip Calibration Scintillator Response.
Quartz Plate Calorimeter Prototype Hardware & Preliminary Test Beam Data Anthony Moeller The University of Iowa.
F ERMILAB T EST B EAM F ACILITY Aria Soha June 12, 2012.
DREAM Coll. Meeting, Rome 2009F. Bedeschi, INFN-Pisa Template Analysis of DRS Data  Motivations  Preliminary results F. Bedeschi, R. Carosi, M. Incagli,
DAMPE has successfully completed 3 weeks of test beam campaign – 2 weeks in the PS T9, 1 week in SPS H4 – ~60 people participated in the setup and data.
Feb. 3, 2007IFC meeting1 Beam test report Ph. Bruel on behalf of the beam test working group Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope.
Manqi Ruan Discussing & Support: Roman, Francois, Vincent, Supervisor: Z. ZHANG (LAL) & Y. GAO (Tsinghua)) DQ Check for CERN Test.
Interactions of pions in the Si-W ECAL prototype Towards a paper Naomi van der Kolk.
Analysis of DHCAL Data José Repond Argonne National Laboratory CALICE Meeting, September 16 – 18, 2009 Université Claude Bernard Lyon I, France.
Rita Carbone, RICAP 11, Roma 3 26/05/2011 Stand-alone low energy measurements of light nuclei from PAMELA Time-of-Flight system. Rita Carbone INFN Napoli.
Analysis of    production ► Data taking ► Reaction identification ► Results for double polarization observable F ► Summary Based on data taken in the.
1 Methods of PSD energy calibration. 2 Dependence of energy resolution on many factors Constant term is essential only for energy measurement of single.
Vertical Slice Test Data
HERD Prototype Beam Test
The Beam Test at Fermilab:
Introduction The aim of this talk is to try to get a feeling on the expected degradation of performance of a calibration once we move from MonteCarlo.
Chris Smith California Institute of Technology EPS Conference 2003
ScECAL+AHCAL+TCMT Combined Beam FNAL
BC2 Commissioning Parameters
A summary of world-wide test beam facilities
Mini Tower Preliminary Results
J. Rutherfoord & P. Schacht 17 May 2004
Steve Magill Steve Kuhlmann ANL/SLAC Motivation
Study of MDC tuning.
What is μ-e Conversion ? μ μ-+(A,Z)→e-+(A,Z) muon decay in orbit
Compton Run Liping Gan June 18, 2004.
Presentation transcript:

Secondary beam analysis – PS and SPS Started May 22, 2012

rpc/PS_pion pion_2.f pion_11.kumac or pion_11_1GeV.kumac Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits electrons: C1 = C2 =1 pions: C1 = C2 = 0 and BC<8 muons: N > 20 and C1 = C2 = 0 and BC>20 Hits in last 2 layers

Not enough memory for run 109 Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits electrons: C1 = C2 =1 and BC < 8 pions: C1 = C2 = 0 and BC<8 muons: N > 10 and C1 = C2 = 0 and BC>20 Hits in last 2 layers

Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits electrons: C1 = C2 =1 and BC < 8 pions: C1 = C2 = 0 and BC<8 muons: N > 10 and C1 = C2 = 0 and BC>20 Hits in last 2 layers

Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits electrons: C1 = C2 =1 and BC < 8 pions: C1 = C2 = 0 and BC<8 muons: N > 10 and C1 = C2 = 0 and BC>20 Hits in last 2 layers

Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits electrons: C1 = C2 =1 and BC < 8 pions: C1 = C2 = 0 and BC<8 muons: N > 10 and C1 = C2 = 0 and BC>20 Hits in last 2 layers

Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits electrons: C1 = C2 =1 and BC < 8 pions: C1 = C2 = 0 and BC<8 muons: N > 10 and C1 = C2 = 0 and BC>20 Hits in last 2 layers

Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits electrons: C1 = C2 =1 and BC < 8 pions: C1 = C2 = 0 and BC<8 muons: N > 10 and C1 = C2 = 0 and BC>20 Hits in last 2 layers

Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits electrons: C1 = C2 =1 and BC < 8 pions: C1 = C2 = 0 and BC<8 muons: N > 10 and C1 = C2 = 0 and BC>20 Hits in last 2 layers

Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits electrons: C1 = C2 =1 and BC < 8 pions: C1 = C2 = 0 and BC<8 muons: N > 10 and C1 = C2 = 0 and BC>20 Hits in last 2 layers

Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits electrons: C1 = C2 =1 and BC < 8 pions: C1 = C2 = 0 and BC 2.0 muons: N > 10 and C1 = C2 = 0 and BC>20 Hits in last 2 layers

rpc/PS_pion/PS_summary.kumac No calibration whatsoeverCalibration with muon response

Fits βα c Fit ± 0.1 Fit ± ± 0.3 Fit 30.0 ± ± ± 0.2

Calibration study α=0.4 This is interesting. It appears that a linear calibration does not work as well as a calibration attenuated by a power… rpc/PS_pion/PS_summary_alpha.kumac runs calib_1.f

Positive beam rpc/PS_pion pion_2.f pion_11_pos.kumac Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits electrons: C1 = C2 =1 and BC < 8 pions: C1 = 0 and C2 = 1 and BC<8 and R > 2.0 protons: C1 = 0 and C2 = 0 and BC<8 and R > 2.0 muons: N > 10 and C1 = 0 and C2 = 1 and BC>20 and Hits in last 2 layers and r<2.0 Run

Run

Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits electrons: C1 = C2 =1 and BC < 8 pions: C1 = 0 and C2 = 1 and BC<8 and R > 2.0 protons: C1 = 0 and C2 = 0 and BC<8 and R > 2.0 muons: N > 10 and C1 = 0 and C2 = 1 and BC>20 and Hits in last 2 layers and r<2.0

Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits electrons: C1 = C2 =1 and BC < 8 pions: C1 = 0 and C2 = 1 and BC<8 and R > 2.0 protons: C1 = 0 and C2 = 0 and BC<8 and R > 2.0 muons: N > 10 and C1 = 0 and C2 = 1 and BC>20 and Hits in last 2 layers and r<2.0

Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits electrons: C1 = C2 =1 and BC < 8 pions: C1 = 0 and C2 = 1 and BC<8 and R > 2.0 protons: C1 = 0 and C2 = 0 and BC<8 and R > 2.0 muons: N > 10 and C1 = 0 and C2 = 1 and BC>20 and Hits in last 2 layers and r<2.0

βα c Fit ± 0.1 Fit ± ± 0.3 Fit 30.0 ± ± ± 0.2 p fit54.4 ± ± 1.7

SPS Run Plan Rates Spills of 9 seconds every 45 seconds -> 720 seconds/hour or 17,280 seconds/day At 50 GeV assume maximum of 100 Hz -> 72,000 events/hour or 1,728,000 events/day At 100 GeV assume maximum of 50 Hz -> 36,000 events/hour or 864,000 events/day Data sets Assume minimum of 500,000 events per energy point Overall plan Start June 4 th in evening (days start at 8 am) 4,5,7,8 -> -50 GeV 6 -> Machine development 9,10, 11, 12 -> ,14,15,16,17 -> +180 July 30 - August 6 -> 7 days: muons, (+180 GeV), high energy run (<300 GeV) November 2-9 -> 7 days: muons (+180 GeV), reserve or high energy again

-120 GeV running (4.5 days) 50, 40 (e and pions), {30 (e and pions),} 60, 80, 100, GeV running (2 days) 120, 150, GeV running (1 day) {30 (e and pions),} 20 (e and pions), {10 (e and pions)} +180 GeV running (5 days) Muons 60, 70, 80, 90 (with Cerenkov tagging of pions) 120, 150, 180

Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits pions: C1 = 0 and C2 = 0 and IL>2 and and no hits in last 4 layers muons: BC>20 and Hits in last 4 layers and r<

Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits pions: No hits in last 4 layers muons: BC>20 and hits in last 4 layers and r<

Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits pions: No hits in last 4 layers muons: BC>20 and hits in last 4 layers and r<

Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits pions: No hits in last 4 layers muons: BC>20 and hits in last 4 layers and r<

June 7, 2012 Study of time difference -Some hits far off in both + and – direction - From now on, only take -18,-19 fort.91 pion_19.kumac

Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits pions: No hits in last 4 layers muons: BC>20 and hits in last 4 layers and r<

Momentum# of events 30692, , , , ,476 TOTAL2,282,705

Event selection all: 1 cluster in layer 0 with at most 3 hits pions: No hits in last 4 layers muons: BC>20 and hits in last 4 layers and r<3.0