LDCPrime optimization studies ILC/ECFA Warsaw, Poland, 9 – 13 June, 2008 M. Valentan for the Vienna ILC group New results from LDCPrime optimization studies with the Vienna Fast Simulation Tool (“LiC Detector Toy”)

LDCPrime optimization studies ILC/ECFA Warsaw, Poland, 9 – 13 June, 2008 M. Valentan for the Vienna ILC group The Vienna Fast Simulation Tool LDT Simple, but flexible and powerful tool –Version 2.0 available for MatLab and GNU Octave Detector design studies –Geometry: cylinders (barrel) or planes (forward/rear) –Material budget, resolutions, inefficiencies Simulation –Solenoid magnetic field, helix track model –Multiple scattering, measurement errors and inefficiencies –No further corruption, therefore no pattern recognition –Strips and pads, uniform and gaussian errors (in TPC with diffusion corr.) Reconstruction –Kalman filter –Optimal linear estimator according to Gauss-Markov (no corruption) –Fitted parameters and corresponding covariances at the beamtube Output –Resolution of the reconstructed track parameters inside the beam tube –Impact parameters (projected and in space) –Test quantities (pulls, χ 2, etc.) –Interface for subsequent vertex fit, as used by CMS

LDCPrime optimization studies ILC/ECFA Warsaw, Poland, 9 – 13 June, 2008 M. Valentan for the Vienna ILC group A. Yamaguchi et. al. Comparison with Jupiter, Mokka Left up:σ(Δp t /p t 2 ) with Jupiter Left down: σ(Δp t /p t 2 ) with LDT red: TPC on, SIT + VTX off green: TPC + SIT on, VTX off blue: TPC + SIT + VTX on Down:green:σ(Δp t /p t 2 ) with Mokka blue:σ(Δp t /p t 2 ) with LDT A. Raspereza

LDCPrime optimization studies ILC/ECFA Warsaw, Poland, 9 – 13 June, 2008 M. Valentan for the Vienna ILC group Detector description: Barrel silicon detectors [1]: Frank Gaede, gear_LDCPrime_02Sc.xml & steer_ldctracking.xml, private communication, April 11, 2008 [2]: M. Vos, LDC Silicon tracker elements, summary table, phone meeting may 14, 2008 NameR [mm]z [mm]Thickness [%X 0 ]σ(RΦ) [μm]σ(z) [μm]Remarks Beam pipe [1] [1] --Passive VTX1 [1] / / Passive / Pixels VTX2 [1] / / Passive / Pixels VTX3 [1] / / Passive / Pixels VTX4 [1] / / Passive / Pixels VTX5 [1] / / Passive / Pixels VTX shell [1] Passive SIT [1] / [1] 380 [2] 0.29 [2] / 0.4 [2] (0.5 [2] )4 [2] 50 [2] Strips / Passive SIT [1] / [1] 660 [2] 0.29 [2] / 0.4 [2] (0.5 [2] )4 [2] 50 [2] Strips / Passive SET11850 ( [2] )2368 (1500 [2] )0.69 [2] 7 [2] 100 [2] Strips + Passive SET21855 ( [2] )2368 (1500 [2] )0.69 [2] 7 [2] 100 [2] Strips + Passive Green: Adjusted to match TPC dimensions Red: To be refined

LDCPrime optimization studies ILC/ECFA Warsaw, Poland, 9 – 13 June, 2008 M. Valentan for the Vienna ILC group Detector description: TPC [3]: R. Settles: private communication, Vienna ILD mini workshop, March 26-28, 2008 NameR [mm]z [mm] Thickness [%X 0 ] σ 0 (RΦ) / σ 1 (RΦ) [μm] σ 0 (z) [μm] C diff (RΦ) [μm/√m] C diff (z) [μm/√m] TPC inner wall305 [1] 2350 [1] 1.3 [1] pad rows371 [1] – 1733 [1] [1] 5.7 ∙ each50 [3] / 900 [3] 20 [3] 53 [3] 800 [3] TPC outer wall1800 [1] 2350 [1] 2 [1] ---- TPC endcaps305 [2] – 1800± [3] ---- σ²(RΦ) = σ 0 2 (RΦ) + σ 1 ²(RΦ)  sin²  + C diff 2 (RΦ)  6mm/h  sin  ∆z[m], σ²(z) = σ 0 (z) + C diff 2 (z)  ∆z[m] h = padrow pitch,  = φ – Φ, = polar angle

LDCPrime optimization studies ILC/ECFA Warsaw, Poland, 9 – 13 June, 2008 M. Valentan for the Vienna ILC group LDCPrime used in this study SET adjusted to cover whole TPC Old FTD geometry used to avoid overlaps

LDCPrime optimization studies ILC/ECFA Warsaw, Poland, 9 – 13 June, 2008 M. Valentan for the Vienna ILC group σ(Δp t /p t 2 ) Projected impact Study 1: Effectiveness of the SIT Differences in momentum resolution only for high momenta –Useless for track fit below 100 GeV/c Question: Is it worth including the SIT? –Improvement of PR, e.g. jet analysis? (V. Saveliev) –Improvement of neutral vertex finding? (A. Raspereza) Blue: Original SIT Green: RΦ error x2 Red: SIT removed

LDCPrime optimization studies ILC/ECFA Warsaw, Poland, 9 – 13 June, 2008 M. Valentan for the Vienna ILC group Study 2: VTX alternatives NameR [mm]z [mm]Thickness [%X 0 ] VTX / / VTX / / VTX / / VTX / / VTX / / NameR [mm]z [mm]Thickness [%X 0 ] VTX / / VTX / / VTX / / VTX / / VTX / / NameR [mm]z [mm]Thickness [%X 0 ] VTX / / VTX / / VTX / / VTX / / VTX / / VTX / / Original: 5 equidistant layers Double layers outside Single layer in the center GLD-like with 3 double layers

LDCPrime optimization studies ILC/ECFA Warsaw, Poland, 9 – 13 June, 2008 M. Valentan for the Vienna ILC group VTX alternatives: Comparison σ(Δp t /p t 2 ) Projected impact Slight differences, GLD-like 3 double layer version (red) seems best solution

LDCPrime optimization studies ILC/ECFA Warsaw, Poland, 9 – 13 June, 2008 M. Valentan for the Vienna ILC group VTX alternatives: Inefficiencies at traversal of full TPC Beam halo: innermost layer(s) may sometimes fail 5 layers equidistant2 double, 1 singleGLD-like 3 double θ = 90º P t = 100 GeV/c GLD-like layout insensitive to in- efficiencies σ(Δp t /p t 2 ) proj. impact

LDCPrime optimization studies ILC/ECFA Warsaw, Poland, 9 – 13 June, 2008 M. Valentan for the Vienna ILC group VTX alternatives: Inefficiencies at traversal of half TPC θ = 27º P t = 100 GeV/c θ = 27º: all VTX layers hit, traversing TPC endplate → more sensitive to loss of innermost measurement σ(Δp t /p t 2 ) proj. impact

LDCPrime optimization studies ILC/ECFA Warsaw, Poland, 9 – 13 June, 2008 M. Valentan for the Vienna ILC group Conclusions Effectiveness of the SIT: –Track fit purposes: SIT useless below 100 GeV/c –Omit it and save money? –If needed, optimization in scope of PR and V 0 finding Vertex detector alternatives: –Only slight differences –GLD-like 3 double layer setup most robust against inefficiencies of the innermost layers –Additional layer, but not yet overinstrumentated

LDCPrime optimization studies ILC/ECFA Warsaw, Poland, 9 – 13 June, 2008 M. Valentan for the Vienna ILC group LDT on the web: Acknowledgements The software was designed and developed by the Vienna ILC Project Group in response to encouragement from the SiLC R&D Project. The development and the studies were supervised by M. Regler. Efficient helix tracking was actively supported by W. Mitaroff. Thanks are due to R. Frühwirth for the barrel Kalman filter algorithms used in the program. Special thanks are due to R. Settles and F. Gaede for fruitful discussions and for their help with comparing LDT with Jupiter and Mokka. References Atsushi Yamaguchi et al: A study of tracker performance with Jupiter, 8 th ACFA Workshop, Daegu, Korea, July 11-14, 2005 Alexei Raspereza: Tracking performance with new Mokka Models LDC01_06Sc & LDCPrime_02Sc, ILD Meeting 23/04/2008 LDTsource_20.zip UserGuide_20.pdf

LDCPrime optimization studies ILC/ECFA Warsaw, Poland, 9 – 13 June, 2008 M. Valentan for the Vienna ILC group Detector description: forward/rear Namez [mm]R in [mm]R out [mm]Thickness [%X 0 ]σ(RΦ) [μm]σ(R) [μm]Remarks FTD1220 [2] 29 [2] 140 [2] 0.58 [2] 7 [2] 100 [2] Pixels FTD2350 [2] 32 [2] 140 (210 [2] )0.58 [2] 7 [2] 100 [2] Pixels FTD3500 [2] 35 [2] 210 (270 [2] )0.58 [2] 7 [2] 100 [2] Pixels FTD4850 [2] 51 [2] 290 [2] 0.69 [2] 7 [2] 1000 [2] Double Strips FTD51200 [2] 72 [2] 290 [2] 0.69 [2] 7 [2] 1000 [2] Double Strips FTD61550 [2] 93 [2] 290 [2] 0.69 [2] 7 [2] 1000 [2] Double Strips FTD71900 [2] 113 [2] 290 [2] 0.69 [2] 7 [2] 1000 [2] Double Strips ETD12368 [2] 305 [2] 1850 (1500 [2] )0.69 [2] 7 (u) [2] -Single Strips ETD22368 [2] 305 [2] 1850 (1500 [2] )0.69 [2] 7 (v) [2] -Single Strips ETD32368 [2] 305 [2] 1850 (1500 [2] )0.69 [2] 7 (x) [2] -Single Strips

LDCPrime optimization studies ILC/ECFA Warsaw, Poland, 9 – 13 June, 2008 M. Valentan for the Vienna ILC group LDCPrime as per summary table SET doesn’t cover whole TPC Overlaps between SIT and FTD

LDCPrime optimization studies ILC/ECFA Warsaw, Poland, 9 – 13 June, 2008 M. Valentan for the Vienna ILC group LDCPrime as used in this study