My work PAST WORKS: 1) (Madrid) Data Analysis in L3, LEP: - Measurement of the Mass, Width and Cross Section of the W boson production at LEP, 1999 - Study.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Monte Carlo tuning using ATLAS data Davide Costanzo (on behalf of the ATLAS collaboration) 1MonteCarlo tuning using ATLAS data23/08/2011.
Advertisements

INTRODUCTION TO e/ ɣ IN ATLAS In order to acquire the full physics potential of the LHC, the ATLAS electromagnetic calorimeter must be able to identify.
Implementation of e-ID based on BDT in Athena EgammaRec Hai-Jun Yang University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (with T. Dai, X. Li, A. Wilson, B. Zhou) US-ATLAS.
Jet and Jet Shapes in CMS
1 N. Davidson E/p single hadron energy scale check with minimum bias events Jet Note 8 Meeting 15 th May 2007.
1 N. Davidson E/p minimum bias update with Athena Analysis Meeting 12 th June 2007.
1 Hadronic In-Situ Calibration of the ATLAS Detector N. Davidson The University of Melbourne.
1 N. Davidson, E. Barberio E/p single hadron energy scale check with minimum bias event Hadronic Calibration Workshop 26 th -27 th April 2007.
1 The CMS Heavy Ion Program Michael Murray Kansas.
A simulation study of the rapidity distributions of leptons from W boson decays at ATLAS Laura Gilbert.
ALICE EMCal Physics and Functional Requirements Overview.
Scintillator (semi)DHCAL? Vishnu Zutshi for. Introduction Can a scintillator (semi)digital calorimeter work? Cell sizes are necessarily 6-12 cm 2 Can.
1 N. Davidson Calibration with low energy single pions Tau Working Group Meeting 23 rd July 2007.
1/9/2003 UTA-GEM Simulation Report Venkatesh Kaushik 1 Simulation Study of Digital Hadron Calorimeter Using GEM Venkatesh Kaushik* University of Texas.
Energy Flow and Jet Calibration Mark Hodgkinson Artemis Meeting 27 September 2007 Contains work by R.Duxfield,P.Hodgson, M.Hodgkinson,D.Tovey.
Calibration of the ZEUS calorimeter for electrons Alex Tapper Imperial College, London for the ZEUS Collaboration Workshop on Energy Calibration of the.
Simulation Calor 2002, March. 27, 2002M. Wielers, TRIUMF1 Performance of Jets and missing ET in ATLAS Monika Wielers TRIUMF, Vancouver on behalf.
2004 Xmas MeetingSarah Allwood WW Scattering at ATLAS.
Cluster Finding Comparisons Ron Cassell SLAC. Clustering Studies This report studies clustering in the EM calorimeter, using SLIC simulated ttbar events.
0 Status of Shower Parameterisation code in Athena Andrea Dell’Acqua CERN PH-SFT.
1 Realistic top Quark Reconstruction for Vertex Detector Optimisation Talini Pinto Jayawardena (RAL) Kristian Harder (RAL) LCFI Collaboration Meeting 23/09/08.
HERA-LHC, CERN Oct Preliminary study of Z+b in ATLAS /1 A preliminary study of Z+b production in ATLAS The D0 measurement of  (Z+b)/  (Z+jet)
Event Reconstruction in SiD02 with a Dual Readout Calorimeter Detector Geometry EM Calibration Cerenkov/Scintillator Correction Jet Reconstruction Performance.
Jet Calibration Experience in CDF Beate Heinemann University of Liverpool -CDF calorimeter -Relative Calibrations -Absolute Calibration -Multiple Interactions.
26 Apr 2009Paul Dauncey1 Digital ECAL: Lecture 1 Paul Dauncey Imperial College London.
Possibility of tan  measurement with in CMS Majid Hashemi CERN, CMS IPM,Tehran,Iran QCD and Hadronic Interactions, March 2005, La Thuile, Italy.
María Cepeda (CIEMAT, Madrid) Valencia, II CPAN days 1.
25 sep Reconstruction and Identification of Hadronic Decays of Taus using the CMS Detector Michele Pioppi – CERN On behalf.
CaloTopoCluster Based Energy Flow and the Local Hadron Calibration Mark Hodgkinson June 2009 Hadronic Calibration Workshop.
1 Calorimetry Simulations Norman A. Graf for the SLAC Group January 10, 2003.
ILC-ECFA Workshop Valencia November 2006 Four-fermion processes as a background in the ILC luminosity calorimeter for the FCAL Collaboration I. Božović-Jelisavčić,
Study of Standard Model Backgrounds for SUSY search with ATLAS detector Takayuki Sasaki, University of Tokyo.
PFAs – A Critical Look Where Does (my) SiD PFA go Wrong? S. R. Magill ANL ALCPG 10/04/07.
Jet Physics at CDF Sally Seidel University of New Mexico APS’99 24 March 1999.
Bangalore, India1 Performance of GLD Detector Bangalore March 9 th -13 th, 2006 T.Yoshioka (ICEPP) on behalf of the.
CALOR April Algorithms for the DØ Calorimeter Sophie Trincaz-Duvoid LPNHE – PARIS VI for the DØ collaboration  Calorimeter short description.
Software offline tutorial, CERN, Dec 7 th Electrons and photons in ATHENA Frédéric DERUE – LPNHE Paris ATLAS offline software tutorial Detectors.
Status of Reconstruction in sidloi3 Ron Cassell 5/20/10.
Study on search of a SM Higgs (120GeV) produced via VBF and decaying in two hadronic taus V.Cavasinni, F.Sarri, I.Vivarelli.
Fast Simulation and the Higgs: Parameterisations of photon reconstruction efficiency in H  events Fast Simulation and the Higgs: Parameterisations of.
1 OO Muon Reconstruction in ATLAS Michela Biglietti Univ. of Naples INFN/Naples Atlas offline software MuonSpectrometer reconstruction (Moore) Atlas combined.
Cal Cluster ID (a.k.a. Eflow) Gary R. Bower, SLAC Santa Cruz LCD Workshop June 28, 2002.
1 1 - To test the performance 2 - To optimise the detector 3 – To use the relevant variable Software and jet energy measurement On the importance to understand.
Individual Particle Reconstruction The PFA Approach to Detector Development for the ILC Steve Magill (ANL) Norman Graf, Ron Cassell (SLAC)
24/08/2009 LOMONOSOV09, MSU, Moscow 1 Study of jet transverse structure with CMS experiment at 10 TeV Natalia Ilina (ITEP, Moscow) for the CMS collaboration.
Jet Studies at CDF Anwar Ahmad Bhatti The Rockefeller University CDF Collaboration DIS03 St. Petersburg Russia April 24,2003 Inclusive Jet Cross Section.
Calibration of the ZEUS calorimeter for hadrons and jets Alex Tapper Imperial College, London for the ZEUS Collaboration Workshop on Energy Calibration.
Régis Lefèvre (LPC Clermont-Ferrand - France)ATLAS Physics Workshop - Lund - September 2001 In situ jet energy calibration General considerations The different.
ATLAS Jet/ETmiss workshop, 24/06/ Scale and resolution Measurement errors Mapping of material in front of EM calorimeters (|  | < 2.5) Inter-calibration:
July 27, 2002CMS Heavy Ions Bolek Wyslouch1 Heavy Ion Physics with the CMS Experiment at the Large Hadron Collider Bolek Wyslouch MIT for the CMS Collaboration.
Search for a Standard Model Higgs Boson in the Diphoton Final State at the CDF Detector Karen Bland [ ] Department of Physics,
ATLAS and the Trigger System The ATLAS (A Toroidal LHC ApparatuS) Experiment [1] is one of the four major experiments operating at the Large Hadron Collider.
Introduction to Hadronic Final State Reconstruction in Collider Experiments Introduction to Hadronic Final State Reconstruction in Collider Experiments.
V. Pozdnyakov Direct photon and photon-jet measurement capability of the ATLAS experiment at the LHC Valery Pozdnyakov (JINR, Dubna) on behalf of the HI.
 reconstruction and identification in CMS A.Nikitenko, Imperial College. LHC Days in Split 1.
DE/dx in ATLAS TILECAL Els Koffeman Atlas/Nikhef Sources: PDG DRDC (1995) report RD34 collaboration CERN-PPE
Direct Photon v 2 Study in 200 GeV AuAu Collisions at RHIC Guoji Lin (Yale) For STAR Collaboration RHIC & AGS Users’ Meeting, BNL, June 5-9.
Some introduction Cosmics events can produce energetic jets and missing energy. They need to be discriminated from collision events with true MET and jets.
Particle detection and reconstruction at the LHC (IV)
Higgs → t+t- in Vector Boson Fusion
Observation of Diffractively Produced W- and Z-Bosons
Individual Particle Reconstruction
Linear Collider Simulation Tools
Sampling Calorimeter Reconstruction Issues and Approaches: An Overview
Plans for checking hadronic energy
Jessica Leonard Oct. 23, 2006 Physics 835
Argonne National Laboratory
Jet Measurements with the EMCal of ALICE
Observation of Diffractively Produced W- and Z-Bosons
Linear Collider Simulation Tools
Presentation transcript:

My work PAST WORKS: 1) (Madrid) Data Analysis in L3, LEP: - Measurement of the Mass, Width and Cross Section of the W boson production at LEP, Study of the e+e-  W+W-  qqe process at LEP, ) (Barcelona) Quality Control of Extender Barrel of the Hadronic Calorimeter TiCal of ATLAS: - RMS left- right side of module, Energy resolution of tile,RMS vs Temperature… - Stability of the velocity of the LED diffuser inside Calorimeter module - Performance of the cut cells of the calorimeter (Tical-Week2002,CERN) TestBeam Analysis of TiCal Detector in CERN, ATLAS - Analysis with pion TBdata TestBeam MonteCarlo Simulation Software Analysis Offline - Energy Flow Algorithm in Atlfast (Fast Simulation in ATLAS) (SW-Week2003,CERN) PRESENT WORK: 3) (Valencia) Software Analysis Offline - Energy Flow in Full Simulation: Study the overlap and gain resolution with single particle FUTURE WORK: Validate Energy Flow in Combined TestBeam 2004: Study the overlap in clusters -Simulation-Reconstruction CTB with single Particle (RecTB) -Data CTB: low pt pion and low pt electron as aprox of the behavior of photon shower

Energy Flow in ATLFAST: Potencial gain in Energy resolution of the Jet Carmen Iglesias IFIC-Intituto de Fisica Corpuscular (TileCal Group, Valencia) (collaborating with IFAE,Barcelona) RTN WorkShop Barcelona 03

Energy Flow Concept EFLOW: Combine calorimeter, tracking and particle ID information to improve energy resolution for jet For low Pt charged particles, tracking error is much smaller than calorimetric energy error. In the Barrel we can approximate (  =0): We can see, for one   of 10 GeV E resolution is 16 % while for P T is 1.3%. The well measured particle momentum substitutes random fluctuation of energy in the calorimeter  improvement in resolution in jet and E T miss energy HOWEVER The use of track to improve the resolution only works if cluster is isolated. If track shares cluster with neutrals then gain in resolution from track by loss of resolution from remaining cluster. Efficiency of algorithm is limited by the overlap between neutral and Charged particles in the cell of the calorimeter We need to know more about this effect and its influence in the analysis Track:  p T /p T  0.036%p T  1.3% Cal:  E/E  50%/  E  Advantages/Disadvantages

Resolution in Atlfast ATHENA: Framework of ‘offline’ Software in ATLAS ATHENA-Atlfast: C++ Object Oriented implementation which provides a fast particle-level simulation of the detector response and its later reconstruction, and allow: –define the 4-momentum of the particles –reconstruct clusters and jets inside the calorimeters –characterize the tracks In Atlfast  no detailed simulation of particle shower neither of the trakcs in Si detector  only a parametrisation of calorimeter E resolution and a simulation of efficiency and Pt resolution in Si detector. Parametrisations were derived from Full Simulation studies: EM Cal resolution HAD Cal resolution Si Detect resolution (  and electrons) (hadrons :   and k  ) (track of e ,   and   ) Effects as overlap of particles inside the cell can be studied byAtlfast, HOWEVER when the influence of the shower is relevant  Full Simulation.  Here the goal is to estimate the potencial gain in resolution of the Energy Flow Algorithm and the degree of overlap of particle inside the jets (1+  10/7000)Pt  /  Pt  at  < ((2.4-  )+0.228) /  Pt  at  > /  Pt  0.03 at  < /  Pt  0.07 at  >3.2

 Generation with PYTHIA 6.2 Generate 1000 events of QCD jets, applying in Pythia the next conditions: -generate jets with differents range of PT(GeV): 20-40, 40-80, , , and Neither Underlying Events nor Minimum Bias effects are included -ISR and FSR are taken into account -|  parton| < 5.0 (calorimeter coverage) Release is used for the reconstruction of QCD jets: - Cone algoritm is used with different values of radius R=0.4 and |  jet| < 2.0, inside Inner coverage to ensure the completed containment within the cone jet. - Pt min of the jet  different values depending on R (multiplicity of jets still significant) Ptmin=20GeV if R=0.7 Ptmin=15GeV if R=0.4  Jet Reconstruction with Atlfast To reconstruct jet from particle energy into the cone select: - only stables particles deposited in Calorimeter mainly charged hadrons (  ± and k ± ) and photons (from  0   ) neutral hadrons (kLO & n) and very few leptons (e ±,  ± and ) - ET>0.5GeV for charged particles - |  partc| < 2.5, only particles inside INNER (calo+track info used)  Jet Reconstruction from particles

Selected Particles Multiplicity  mainly charged hadrons and photons, leptons are negligible (<0.5%)  Number of particle increase as the E is bigger and slightly bigger at R=0.7  Similar contribution from charged had and photons  Characteristc of the fragmentation Et deposited by particles  ET deposited by particles increase as the ET of jet is bigger  most of ET from charged had (2/3 parts), more than twice that from photons  Et per jet in R=0.7 is bigger than 0.4 Charged hadNeutral hadPhotons per jet(%)per jet(%)per jet(%) Charged hadNeutral hadPhotons per jet(%)per jet(%)per jet(%) Total in jet Charged had Neutral hadPhotons per jet(%)per jet(%)per jet(%) Total in jet Charged had Neutral hadPhotons per jet(%)per jet(%)per jet(%) R=0.4 R=0.7 R=0.4

Analysis by Cells 1) The number of charged hadrons is ~ 47% of the total particles 2) The ET deposited by charged hadrons is ~ 61% of the total energy BUT  We are going to apply the Energy Flow to the charged hadrons, BUT not to all  only to the charged hadrons which fell down in cell without sharing with neutral particles, SO we need: a) define the calorimeter CELL that the particles hits Grid of 81 cells with 0.1 x 0.1 granularity in  -  plane around deposition point of jet b) classification of the cell based on the type of particle (charged or neutral) that fell in it CHARGED CELLS: only charged partic (  ± and k ± ) NEUTRAL CELLS: only photons MIXED CELLS: mixed charged and neutral particles  in this last case it’s analyzed the overlap between charged had and photons or neutral had

 Number of Cells Most of Mixed Cells are in DR<0.1  overlap dominate the central cell Et jet (GeV) Charged CellsNeutral CellsMixed Cells per jet(%)per jet(%)per jet(%)  this proportion decrease quickly as the ET of jets is bigger  ET in Mixed Cell increase with E  Overlap will be bigger  the gain will be worse with E  ET deposited in cells Up to 45% of total ET, in the best case, come from charged had in Charged cells. For this ET a gain in resolution will be done by E-Flow

Applying Energy Flow : 0.5/  Pt  0.03 at  <3.2 resolution of charged hadrons ~13% resolution of charged hadrons ~1 % (1+  10/7000 )Pt  at  <2.5  Apply Energy Flow only over CHARGED cells to avoid loss of resolution from neutral particles. For charged hadrones in these cells: sustitute HAD Cal Resolution: by INNER Detect resolution (if we include dependance on  ) :

Improvement in ET of the jet (Range 40-80GeV and DR=0.4) Aplying HAD Cal smearing: 0.5/  Pt  0.03 at  <3.2 resolution of ET del jet ~8% Aplying INNER smearing resolution of ET del jet ~4.5% much better result than with HAD Cal (1+  10/7000 )Pt  at  <2.5 Resolution of the Energy of the jet have been improved in ~44%

Variation of gain in resolution CONCLUSIONS  Very optimistic result  high gain in resolution using Energy Flow at low Pt. ~40 %  The improvement decrease with E.  At a few 100 GeV the overlap of particles gets higher and the gain in resolution is marginal RMS HAD RMS INNER (%) R=0.4 RMS HAD RMS INNER (%) R=0.7