CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, 20051 Analysis Note on the Validation of the ORCA Simulation of the Endcap Muon CSC Front-end Electronics S. Durkin -- Ohio.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
J.C Santiard CERN EP-MIC ANALOG AND DIGITAL PROCESSING FOR THE READOUT OF RADIATION DETECTORS  J.C. Santiard, CERN, Geneva, CH
Advertisements

Digital Filtering Performance in the ATLAS Level-1 Calorimeter Trigger David Hadley on behalf of the ATLAS Collaboration.
ECAL Spike Plot Approval ECAL Anomalous Signal Plots Approval Adi Bornheim for ECAL
US Beam Test Results and ORCA validation for CMS EMU CSC front-end electronics N. Terentiev Carnegie Mellon University CMS EMU Meeting, CERN June 18, 2005.
1 Study of the Tail Catcher Muon Tracker (TCMT) Scintillator Strips and Leakage with Simulated Coil Rick Salcido Northern Illinois University For CALICE.
US FAST site EMU CSC test results – a global view from ROOT N. Terentiev (Carnegie Mellon University) Fermilab July 23, 2004.
Track Fitting and Comparator Results Emu UC Davis Feb. 26, 2005 Yangheng Zheng University of California, Los Angeles  Motivation & Introduction.
US Test Beam Results Of Front End Timing T. Ferguson, N. Terentiev* (Carnegie Mellon University) CMS EMU Meeting University of California, Davis Feb 25.
US Test beam data analysis & validation of OSCAR/ORCA Tim Cox, UC Davis Nikolai Terentiev*, CMU CMS Physics Week Fermilab Apr , 2005.
GEM DHCAL Simulation Studies J. Yu* Univ. of Texas at Arlington ALCW, July 15, 2003 Cornell University (*on behalf of the UTA team; S. Habib, V. Kaushik,
US FAST site test results – a global view from ROOT T. Ferguson, A. Korytov, N. Terentiev* CMS EMU Meeting The Ohio State University April 16 – 17, 2004.
Position sensing in a GEM from charge dispersion on a resistive anode Bob Carnegie, Madhu Dixit, Steve Kennedy, Jean-Pierre Martin, Hans Mes, Ernie Neuheimer,
US Beam Test Results and ORCA validation for CMS EMU CSC front-end electronics N. Terentiev Carnegie Mellon University CMS EMU Meeting, Fermilab October.
Y. Karadzhov MICE Video Conference Thu April 9 Slide 1 Absolute Time Calibration Method General description of the TOF DAQ setup For the TOF Data Acquisition.
US LPC Muon Group CMSSW code development efforts N. Terentiev Carnegie Mellon University CMS EMU Meeting, Florida Institute of Technology February 17-18,
TB & Simulation results Jose E. Garcia & M. Vos. Introduction SCT Week – March 03 Jose E. Garcia TB & Simulation results Simulation results Inner detector.
VELO ADC vs Charge Calibration Jianchun Wang April 16, 2008 This is an update to the presentation at April 11 st VELO Group Meeting. A new scan data of.
US FAST site test results – a global view from ROOT T. Ferguson, A. Korytov, N. Terentiev* CMS EMU Meeting The Ohio State University April 16 – 17, 2004.
US News from the LPC Muon Group E. James, M. Mulders, N. Terentiev* CMS EMU Meeting University of California, Davis Feb , 2005.
A data-driven performance evaluation method for CMS RPC trigger system & Study of Muon trigger efficiencies with official Tag & Probe package for ICHEP.
The Transverse detector is made of an array of 256 scintillating fibers coupled to Avalanche PhotoDiodes (APD). The small size of the fibers (5X5mm) results.
Timing Jitter and Cross Talk in the SRS + Xray scan of FIT zigzag board Michael Phipps, Bob Azmoun, and Craig Woody 1.
W  eν The W->eν analysis is a phi uniformity calibration, and only yields relative calibration constants. This means that all of the α’s in a given eta.
NSW background studies Max Bellomo, Nektarios Benekos, Niels van Eldik, Andrew Haas, Peter Kluit, Jochen Meyer, Felix Rauscher 1.
Monte Carlo Comparison of RPCs and Liquid Scintillator R. Ray 5/14/04  RPCs with 1-dimensional readout (generated by RR) and liquid scintillator with.
15 Dec 2010 CERN Sept 2010 beam test: Sensor response study Chris Walmsley and Sam Leveridge (presented by Paul Dauncey) 1Paul Dauncey.
Outrigger Timing Calibration & Reconstruction Milagro – 11/17/03 Shoup – 1 Purpose: To incorporate outrigger hits in event angle fitting Additionally incorporated.
Kalanand Mishra April 27, Branching Ratio Measurements of Decays D 0  π - π + π 0, D 0  K - K + π 0 Relative to D 0  K - π + π 0 Giampiero Mancinelli,
Performance of a Large-Area GEM Detector Prototype for the Upgrade of the CMS Muon Endcap System Vallary Bhopatkar M. Hohlmann, M. Phipps, J. Twigger,
Dec.11, 2008 ECL parallel session, Super B1 Results of the run with the new electronics A.Kuzmin, Yu.Usov, V.Shebalin, B.Shwartz 1.New electronics configuration.
Mitglied der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft Calibration of the COSY-TOF STT & pp Elastic Analysis Sedigheh Jowzaee IKP Group Talk 11 July 2013.
June 22, 2009 P. Colas - Analysis meeting 1 D. Attié, P. Colas, M. Dixit, Yun-Ha Shin (Carleton and Saclay) Analysis of Micromegas Large Prototype data.
A Study of Proton-Proton Collisions at the LHC The Ohio State University - Task A.2 B.G. Bylsma, L.S. Durkin, D. Fisher, J Gilmore, J.H. Gu, D. Larson,
G4 Validation meeting (5/11/2003) S.VIRET LPSC Grenoble Photon testbeam Data/G4 comparison  Motivation  Testbeam setup & simulation  Analysis & results.
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.
 The zigzag readout board is divided into eight η-sectors; each sector has a length of ~12 cm and comprises 128 zigzag strips; zigzag strips run in radial.
Min-DHCAL: Measurements with Pions Benjamin Freund and José Repond Argonne National Laboratory CALICE Collaboration Meeting Max-Planck-Institute, Munich.
1 DT Local Reconstruction on CRAFT data Plots for approval CMS- Run meeting, 26/6/09 U.Gasparini, INFN & Univ.Padova on behalf of DT community [ n.b.:
T. Lari – INFN Milan Status of ATLAS Pixel Test beam simulation Status of the validation studies with test-beam data of the Geant4 simulation and Pixel.
NA62 straw readout Characterization and qualification of the frontend electronics Detector and interface to frontend Small readout system Plans Expected.
Reconstructing energy from HERD beam test data Zheng QUAN IHEP 3 rd HERD work shop Xi’an, 20 Jan
SRS Calibration Michael Phipps, Bob Azmoun, Craig Woody 1.
US AFEB timing in CSCs in splash events, run N. Terentiev, CMU CSC Synchronization meeting Nov. 16, 2009, CERN.
M. LefebvreATLAS LAr week, November 19th HEC-EMEC beam test data analysis Filtering weight synchronization and timing issues TDC timing Cubic timing.
Muons at CalDet Introduction Track Finder Package ADC Corrections Drift Points Path Length Attenuation Strip-to-Strip Calibration Scintillator Response.
1 EMCAL Reconstruction in Pass pp 900 GeV 29/03/2010 Gustavo Conesa Balbastre.
D. Attié, P. Colas, E. Delagnes, M. Riallot M. Dixit, J.-P. Martin, S. Bhattacharya, S. Mukhopadhyay Linear Collider Power Distribution & Pulsing Workshop.
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.
Paolo Massarotti Kaon meeting March 2007  ±  X    X  Time measurement use neutral vertex only in order to obtain a completely independent.
09/06/06Predrag Krstonosic - CALOR061 Particle flow performance and detector optimization.
1 UCSD Meeting Calibration of High Pt Hadronic W Haifeng Pi 10/16/2007 Outline Introduction High Pt Hadronic W in TTbar and Higgs events Reconstruction.
3/06/06 CALOR 06Alexandre Zabi - Imperial College1 CMS ECAL Performance: Test Beam Results Alexandre Zabi on behalf of the CMS ECAL Group CMS ECAL.
Simulation and reconstruction of CLAS12 Electromagnetic Calorimeter in GSIM12 S. Stepanyan (JLAB), N. Dashyan (YerPhI) CLAS12 Detector workshop, February.
 13 Readout Electronics A First Look 28-Jan-2004.
Brunel University London Field-off LiH Energy Loss Rhys Gardener CM45 – July 28th.
Analysis of LumiCal data from the 2010 testbeam
Pulse Shape Fitting Beam Test September, October CERN
A First Look J. Pilcher 12-Mar-2004
Slice Test: Preliminary Data Analysis The Ohio State University
5% The CMS all silicon tracker simulation
DAQMB/FEBs Readiness for First Beam
BESIII EMC electronics
Rick Salcido Northern Illinois University For CALICE Collaboration
Engineering Design Review
SCT Wafer Distortions (Bowing)
The Ohio State University USCMS EMU Meeting, FNAL, Oct. 29, 2004
CAL crosstalk issues and their implications
Rick Salcido Northern Illinois University For CALICE Collaboration
Presentation transcript:

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Analysis Note on the Validation of the ORCA Simulation of the Endcap Muon CSC Front-end Electronics S. Durkin -- Ohio State University N. Terentiev, T. Ferguson -- Carnegie Mellon University

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Introduction In preparation for the Physics TDR, Part 1, we want to document work done mainly by N. Terentiev on validating the ORCA simulation of the endcap muon CSC front-end electronics. We have submitted an Analysis Note 2005/066 describing the work, and we hope to get approval so that it can become a full CMS Note that can be referenced in the TDR. I will give a summary of the method and the results described in the note.

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Cathode Front-end Electronics Pulses on each cathode strip are amplified, shaped and then sampled every 50 ns by a switched capacitor array (SCA). When a trigger is received, 8 consecutive SCA samples are digitized and readout. See figure on next slide. ORCA must correctly simulate the pulse shape and the cross-talk on the neighboring strips. Parameter values in ORCA were taken from preproduction electronics and early test-beam results. How good is the simulation?

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Example of 2 Pulse Shapes Pulse-shape parameters: T s = Pulse arrival time. T 0 = ¼ of Pulse peaking time.

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Data Used Use test-beam data from 2003/2004 with final electronics – 150 GeV/c muon beam, 4 different types of CSCs, and a 25 ns LHC-like beam structure. Also have special pulser data taken in April at SX5 to measure the pulse shape of the cross-talk signal. Fit the pulse height shape on the middle strip and the two neighboring strips for the 4 SCA time samples near the pulse peak. Compare results for test-beam data, pulser data and from the ORCA simulation. Use 100 GeV/c single-muon ORCA events in full CMS geometry. OSCAR_3_7_0 and ORCA_8_7_1.

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Example of SCA Test-beam Data to Fit Time (ns) Strip Left Strip Middle Strip Right Strip

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Fit to Data Important fit parameters are the peaking time, 4T 0, (T 0 = 35 ns) of the signal pulse and the cross-talk coefficient, C t (C t = 0.1) between the neighboring strips. We first fit the pulser data to get the pulse shape for the cross-talk pulses on the neighboring strips. (See next slide.) Then fit the test-beam and pulser data and the ORCA simulation data to find the peaking time and cross-talk. Compare the resulting distributions of the peaking time and the cross-talk coefficient.

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Pulse Shapes from fit to Pulser Data Pulsed middle strip 2 side strips with cross-talk

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Comparison of Pulse Peaking Times in ORCA and in Test-beam Data

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Comparison of Cross-talk Coefficients from ORCA and from the Test-beam

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Numerical Results for Peaking Time and Cross-talk Coefficient Data Type Average T 0 (ns) R.M.S. T 0 (ns) Average C t R.M.S. C t Test-beam Data ORCA Simulation Pulser Data –

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Summary of Fit Results There is good agreement in the pulse peaking time between the ORCA simulation and the test- beam data. This was expected since the single- electron response function used in ORCA is quite close to the function determined for the production cathode front-end electronics. (See figure on next slide.) The cross-talk coefficients from ORCA are slightly lower than in the test-beam data. This was also expected, since the ORCA simulation treats the cross-talk using an old, approximate formula.

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Comparison of ORCA and More Recent Single-Electron Response Functions

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Pulse-shape Restoration Because of variations in trigger timing, electronics delays and electron drift times, the cathode pulses have a range of possible arrival times, T s. This means that the SCA samples pulses at different times with respect to the beginning of the pulse. We can use this to reconstruct the pulse shape with a much finer resolution than the 50 ns SCA sampling time. We measure the pulse arrival time in the fit. Subtracting this value from each SCA sampling time for each event, gives us the “restored” cathode pulse shape. We can do this for the test-beam and pulser data, as well as for the ORCA simulation. Results are on the next slides.

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Restored Pulse Shapes from a Single Layer of CSC from Test-beam Data Plot SCA(t-T s )/Q for each pulse vs. t-T s, where SCA is the ADC value for each time bin and Q is the total charge on the strip. This should give a universal “restored” pulse shape.

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Average Pulse Shapes for Different CSCs from Test-beam Data

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Comparison of Pulse Shapes for Test-beam, Pulser and ORCA Simulation

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Measurement of Cross-talk versus Time Using the restored pulse shape with the arrival time subtracted, we can also measure the cross- talk on the neighboring strips as a function of time for the test-beam and pulser data, and in ORCA. Plot: SCA left (t) SCA right (t) + SCA middle (t) + SCA left (t)

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Cross-talk Ratio versus Time for Test-beam, Pulser and ORCA Simulation The cross-talk coefficient, C t, is approximately the slope of these curves. So these results are consistent with our earlier fitted results -> C t is about 15% smaller in the ORCA simulation than in the test- beam and pulser data.

CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Summary The pulse shape of cathode strip signals simulated in ORCA agrees very well with the shape of real signals from test-beam and pulser data. This results comes from both fitting the pulses and from finding the “restored” pulse shapes. The cross-talk coefficients and the shape of the cross-talk pulses in ORCA are in reasonable agreement with the data, but more up-to-date values should be installed.