Report from the Muon Trigger WG Aleandro Nisati On behalf of the Muon Trigger Slice Community Muon Week, April 18° 2007

Level-1

LVL1 Barrel: Efficiency curves for low-p T thresholds CSC single muons data (Athena release12.0.3) LvL1 performances have been studied using CommonMuonSlice AANT produced with rel CSC single muons data (Athena release12.0.3) LvL1 performances have been studied using CommonMuonSlice AANT produced with rel p T [GeV] Standard low-p T thresholds (6, 8, 10 GeV/c) p T [GeV] log scale

LVL1 barrel : Low-pT Trigger rates Using the Level-1 Efficiency curves we may estimate the rates with different threshold. Muon sources 10 GeV 10 GeV threshold Lumi= GeV 8 GeV threshold Lumi= GeV 6 GeV threshold Lumi= GeV 5 GeV threshold Lumi=10 33 "Cosmic" "Cosmic" threshold Lumi=10 33  /K 5400 Hz8830 Hz10470 Hz21800 Hz62500 Hz b 920 Hz1160 Hz1650 Hz2220 Hz3360 Hz c 510 Hz660 Hz970 Hz1400 Hz2400 Hz W 3 Hz t Negligible Sum 6.8 kHz11 kHz13 kHz25.5 kHz68.3 kHz

Standard high-p T thresholds (11, 20, 40 GeV/c) CSC single muons data (Athena release12.0.3) LvL1 performances have been studied using CommonMuonSlice AANT produced with rel High-pT plateau at 78% CSC single muons data (Athena release12.0.3) LvL1 performances have been studied using CommonMuonSlice AANT produced with rel High-pT plateau at 78% p T [GeV] LVL1 Barrel: Efficiency curves for high-p T thresholds log scale

LVL1 barrel : High-pT Trigger rates Muon sources 11 GeV 11 GeV threshold Lumi= GeV 20 GeV threshold Lumi= GeV 40 GeV threshold Lumi=10 34  /K 7420 Hz3540 Hz670 Hz b 2330 Hz760 Hz280 Hz c 1100 Hz340 Hz130 Hz W 28 Hz26 Hz23 Hz t Negligible Sum 12 kHz4.7 kHz1.1 kHz Level-1 Efficiency Inclusive μ LHC (prompt μ and  /K decay) Preliminary

LVL1 barrel : Trigger rates vs. Threshold threshold [GeV] Rate [Hz] The plot shows the expected single muon trigger rates at a luminosity of cm -2 s -1. The cosmic configuration is plotted with a threshold of 3 GeV.

Latest TGC(endcap) LVL1 trigger software(towards ) TrigT1TGC The algorithm creating CBNTAA is added. - Some minor bugs are fixed. TGCcabling Bug fixed Effect of these bugs are negligible. Latest TGC(endcap) LVL1 trigger software(towards ) TrigT1TGC The algorithm creating CBNTAA is added. - Some minor bugs are fixed. TGCcabling Bug fixed Effect of these bugs are negligible. Future plan (once CBNTAA data is available) - perform rate calculation with the latest trigger configuration - optimize coincidence window and investigate position dependency - more detailed study of LVL1 di-muon trigger. Future plan (once CBNTAA data is available) - perform rate calculation with the latest trigger configuration - optimize coincidence window and investigate position dependency - more detailed study of LVL1 di-muon trigger. Endcaps : Software Status

We used these data set. - Single muon events produced with athena (RDO) - Use TrigT1TGC for LVL1 trigger simulation 6GeV 20GeV 3-station coincidence trigger efficiency of TGC Endcap Trigger Efficiency

Endcap Trigger Rates Muon sources Threshold = 6 GeV Threshold = 5 GeV  /K 5.9?? beauty 1.8?? charm 1.0?? W negligible top negligible total 8.7?? Threshold = 20 GeV Threshold = 40 GeV negligible L=10 33 cm -2 s -1 L=10 34 cm -2 s -1

MuCTPI overlap resolution in the endcap We discovered that the sector numbering in the TGC and MuCTPI simulations were not consistent This led to an increased fake double-count rate, since some sector edges were not handled by either simulation. Compensating for it in the MuCTPI simulation, this is how the EC double-count probabilities change. This results in a 315 Hz  37 Hz fake double count rate reduction in the endcap. (Preliminary result) The total fake di muon rate goes from 432 Hz to ~154 Hz without MuCTPI with MuCTPI after the fix

Overlap type w/o overlap removal in MuCTPI with overlap removal in MuCTPI Barrel-Barrel169 Hz81 Hz Barrel-Endcap174 Hz8 Hz Endcap-Endcap486 Hz*37 Hz* Forward-Forward43 Hz*28 Hz* Total 872 Hz154 Hz (*) Not using strip masks on sector edges. This may improve the rejection of double counting. MuCTPI overlap resolution in the endcap

LVL2 Algorithms

muFast: improvements since last TP week  Fast resolution improved by the use of LUT for separate charge; –6 GeV resolution moves from 10% to 7%; degradation of the resolution at high-p T due to the vertex spread recovered by the use of the MDT fit segment from the Innermost Station; comparison between  Fast resolution obtained making use of different reconstructed variables (alpha and beta angles) shows a similar behaviour but: –alpha has more coverage than beta; –alpha shows less tails in the resolution distributions Studies on which variables is best to use is still going on; Studies to improve the timing of the calibration access are ongoing too.   RR

muFast: improvements since last TP Week mFast resolution improved by the use of LUT for separate charge; –6 GeV resolution moves from 10% to 7%; degradation of the resolution at high-pT due to the vertex spread recovered by the use of the MDT fit segment from the Innermost Station; comparison between mFast resolution obtained making use of different reconstructed variables (alpha and beta angles) shows a similar behaviour but: –alpha has more coverage than beta; –alpha shows less tails in the resolution –distributions Studies on which variables is best to use is still going on; Studies to improve the timing of the calibration access are ongoing too.  

muFast: Using charge dependent LUT We use a Look-Up Table to calculate p T from the angle α. By taking into account the charge difference in the LUT, we see an improvement in the overall resolution ~10 %  ~7 %

muFast:Momentum measurement Momentum measurement using alpha, beta, radius and DeltaR Performances obtained using sample with no spread in Z for primary vertex. (Slight difference in dataset wrt previous measurement) As expected momentum measurement from radius and deltaR are linear wrt momentum on large momentum range. Sigma of Resolution distributions Mean of Resolution distributions

Accessing the MDT calibration constants at LVL2 Problem: Using MDT calibration a` la offline takes ~40%~50% of total muFast time First: Understand the best granularity to access the MDT calibration constants (per tube, per layer, per station,...) Looking at Sector13 cosmics data (Nov 2006) accessing t0 and r-t relation per MultiLayer should be good enough (at least for LVL2 trigger purposes ) Drift length From M. Iodice Muon week talk  ~ 7ns  ~4ns T0 distribution BIL1 BIL2 BIL3

LVL2  Isol Status Algorithm: –Included in 13 nightlies –Migration to new steering:done –Configurables migration: on going (ready in 1 week) Monitoring: –new monitoring module added: AANT + Histograms –so far used for CSC studies, eventually will provide monitoring histograms for DQ Performances/Optimization studies: –Just started: timing  cones/cell energy threshold optimization –To follow: efficiency for Z/W , rejection against bb  X BG

Event Filter

TrigMoore : Brief Reminder (12.0.6) Two different running modes:Seeded Reconstruction performed only in the geometrical regions provided by the RoIs of previous levels. Full scan Full reconstruction, ~equivalent to the offline working mode Seeding Algorithms assume the seed is from LVL2 or a LVL1 ROI Full functionality in barrel and end-caps 3 istances of TrigMoore called by the steering, for reconstruction in the MS, extrapolation to the IP and combination with ID tracks TrigMoore attaches to the TE a "TrigMooreFeature" for each ROI, accessed by TrigMooreHypo for p T test TrigMoore records in SG the TrigMooreFeature per each ROI and all reconstructed tracks in the event in a single container for conversion in Trk:Track format and subsequent output in ESD and AOD LVL2 (muFast) Moore Algs LVL1 MuIdStandAloneAlgs TrigMoore Seeding Algs MuIdCombinedAlgs Hypo Alg LVL2 (muComb) LVL2 ID Offline ID

Work Ongoing for Rel 13 TrigMoore and TrigMooreHypo have been migrated to the new trigger steering –first validation OK; more robustness test will follow Use of the configurables EDM Migration (see next slides) Use of HLT seeded New Tracking ID for combined muons in TrigMuidCombined (see next slides) Ongoing work to increase modularity: –present implementation not very flexible –we’ll have 3 HLTalgos instead of 3 instances of TrigMoore

EDM Migration Need to adapt Moore to be able to easily use new pattern recognition algs – Cosmic pattern recognition – Local CSC and MDT tracking –to be able to easily output objects required for Calibration/Alignment studies –use of PRD as common input Motivated by Common Tracking for ATLAS and by desire for increased commonality in Muon-specific reco software The current (12.0.6) implementation of TrigMoore uses digits (RDO) as input objects. Standard muon-sw converters or the production of digits from (transient) byte-stream or from RDO are used. Need to use Muon PrepRawData as input. Phi Patterns RZ Patterns Combine Patterns Calibrated Segments Combined Segments Roads (Trig)Moore PhiPatternsAlgTool RZPatternsAlgTool

First exercise to look at rates at p T thresholds different than the typical scenarios: 6 and 20 GeV/c Trigger rates Luminosity set to cm -2 s -1 Typical scenarios: mu(6) 3.0 kHz mu(20) 25 Hz efficiencies for LVL1 from F. Conventi for 6, 8, 10 GeV/c (in good agreement with our estimates) our estimates for 11, 20, 40 GeV/c

First exercise to look at rates at the EF in the END CAPS and vs p T thresholds Trigger rates Luminosity set to cm -2 s -1 Typical scenarios: mu(6) 3.1 kHz mu(20) 27 Hz cm -2 s -1 Barrel + EndCap EF cm -2 s -1 mu(6) 6.1 kHz mu(20) 52 Hz Efficiencies for LVL1 from our estimate maybe slightly inaccurate for the known bugs in TGCCabling expected effects at EF <10%

Trigger Rates Rate for mu(5) at the EF in the barrel use LVL1 efficiency for the barrel with the trigger re-configured to have 5GeV/c as lowest threshold Luminosity set to cm -2 s -1 Muon sources 5 GeV/c threshold kHz 6 GeV/c threshold kHz  /K b c W0.003 tnegligible Total 6.9 kHz 3.0 kHz

Nothing exists for the moment for Muon Slice DQA but what implemented for monitoring during 2004 test beam (A. Di Mattia for LVL2) and the test of the trigger slices on the pre-series machines at Point 1 in december 2006 (D. Scannicchio for EF) can be a starting point for Data Quality Monitoring Shows linear distribution between 1/s and p T as expected Core of the fit residual matching the resolution of the single tube: 80  m. e.g. MuFast histos from last technical run Trigger/TrigAlgorithms/TrigmuFast/src/OnlineSurvey.cxx Muon Slice Data Quality (II)

e.g. TrigMoore histos for the ongoing technical run Trigger/TrigAlgorithms/TrigMoore/src/TrigMooreHisto.cxx (here obtained running the jobOptions prepared for the on-line with a bytestream file containing 50 top events as input: muons are selected by the LVL2 and the EF muon algorithms) Muon Slice Data Quality (III)