The ATLAS Trigger: High-Level Trigger Commissioning and Operation During Early Data Taking Ricardo Gonçalo, Royal Holloway University of London On behalf.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ATLAS ATLAS PESA Meeting 25/04/02 B-Trigger Working Group Work-plan This talk:
Advertisements

G ö khan Ü nel / CHEP Interlaken ATLAS 1 Performance of the ATLAS DAQ DataFlow system Introduction/Generalities –Presentation of the ATLAS DAQ components.
Sander Klous on behalf of the ATLAS Collaboration Real-Time May /5/20101.
Jet Slice Status Report Ricardo Gonçalo (LIP) and David Miller (Chicago) For the Jet Trigger Group Trigger General Meeting – 9 July 2014.
ATLAS Trigger "sur le terrain" Physique ATLAS France Evian Octobre 2009 C. Clément (Stockholm University) Evian, Octobre 2009 ATLAS Trigger.
TRIGGER STATUS AND MENU OPTIMIZATION LHCC Referee Meeting with ATLAS – 7 th July 2009 Ricardo Gonçalo (RHUL) on behalf of ATLAS Trigger/DAQ.
Digital Filtering Performance in the ATLAS Level-1 Calorimeter Trigger David Hadley on behalf of the ATLAS Collaboration.
Valeria Perez Reale University of Bern SM Higgs Discovery Channels ATLAS High Level Trigger Trigger & Physics Selection Higgs Channels: Physics Performance.
A Fast Level 2 Tracking Algorithm for the ATLAS Detector Mark Sutton University College London 7 th October 2005.
CMS High Level Trigger Selection Giuseppe Bagliesi INFN-Pisa On behalf of the CMS collaboration EPS-HEP 2003 Aachen, Germany.
1 Introduction to Geneva ATLAS High Level Trigger Activities Xin Wu Journée de réflexion du DPNC, 11 septembre, 2007 Participants Assitant(e)s: Gauthier.
The First-Level Trigger of ATLAS Johannes Haller (CERN) on behalf of the ATLAS First-Level Trigger Groups International Europhysics Conference on High.
The ATLAS High Level Trigger Steering Journée de réflexion – Sept. 14 th 2007 Till Eifert DPNC – ATLAS group.
Kostas KORDAS INFN – Frascati XI Bruno Touschek spring school, Frascati,19 May 2006 Higgs → 2e+2  O (1/hr) Higgs → 2e+2  O (1/hr) ~25 min bias events.
The LHCb DAQ and Trigger Systems: recent updates Ricardo Graciani XXXIV International Meeting on Fundamental Physics.
J. Leonard, U. Wisconsin 1 Commissioning the Trigger of the CMS Experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider Jessica L. Leonard Real-Time Conference Lisbon,
July 7, 2008SLAC Annual Program ReviewPage 1 High-level Trigger Algorithm Development Ignacio Aracena for the SLAC ATLAS group.
Trigger (& some DAQ basics) tutorial Alessandro Cerri (CERN), Ricardo Goncalo (Royal Holloway)
Top Trigger Strategy in ATLASWorkshop on Top Physics, 18 Oct Patrick Ryan, MSU Top Trigger Strategy in ATLAS Workshop on Top Physics Grenoble.
The ATLAS trigger Ricardo Gonçalo Royal Holloway University of London.
Real Time 2010Monika Wielers (RAL)1 ATLAS e/  /  /jet/E T miss High Level Trigger Algorithms Performance with first LHC collisions Monika Wielers (RAL)
March 2003 CHEP Online Monitoring Software Framework in the ATLAS Experiment Serguei Kolos CERN/PNPI On behalf of the ATLAS Trigger/DAQ Online Software.
High Level Triggering Fred Wickens. High Level Triggering (HLT) Introduction to triggering and HLT systems –What is Triggering –What is High Level Triggering.
L3 Filtering: status and plans D  Computing Review Meeting: 9 th May 2002 Terry Wyatt, on behalf of the L3 Algorithms group. For more details of current.
Tracking at the ATLAS LVL2 Trigger Athens – HEP2003 Nikos Konstantinidis University College London.
The ATLAS trigger Ricardo Gonçalo Royal Holloway, 14 January 2009.
The CMS Level-1 Trigger System Dave Newbold, University of Bristol On behalf of the CMS collaboration.
Overview of the High-Level Trigger Electron and Photon Selection for the ATLAS Experiment at the LHC Ricardo Gonçalo, Royal Holloway University of London.
What’s in the ATLAS data : Trigger Decision ATLAS Offline Software Tutorial CERN, August 2008 Ricardo Gonçalo - RHUL.
Copyright © 2000 OPNET Technologies, Inc. Title – 1 Distributed Trigger System for the LHC experiments Krzysztof Korcyl ATLAS experiment laboratory H.
Ricardo Gonçalo (RHUL) Higgs WG meeting – 28 th August, 2007 Outline: Introduction & release plans Progress in menus for cm -2 s -1 Workshop on trigger.
TRIGGER STATUS AND MENU OPTIMIZATION LHCC Referee Meeting with ATLAS – 7 th July 2009 Ricardo Gonçalo (RHUL) on behalf of the ATLAS TDAQ.
ATLAS HLT in PPD John Baines, Dmitry Emeliyanov, Julie Kirk, Monika Wielers, Will Dearnaley, Fred Wickens, Stephen Burke 1.
1 John Baines Commissioning of the ATLAS High Level Trigger.
1 “Steering the ATLAS High Level Trigger” COMUNE, G. (Michigan State University ) GEORGE, S. (Royal Holloway, University of London) HALLER, J. (CERN) MORETTINI,
Valeria Perez Reale University of Bern On behalf of the ATLAS Physics and Event Selection Architecture Group 1 ATLAS Physics Workshop Athens, May
Status of trigger software and EDM Ricardo Gonçalo, RHUL – on behalf of ATLAS TDAQ.
The ATLAS Trigger: High-Level Trigger Commissioning and Operation During Early Data Taking Ricardo Gonçalo, Royal Holloway University of London On behalf.
Navigation Timing Studies of the ATLAS High-Level Trigger Andrew Lowe Royal Holloway, University of London.
IOP HEPP: Beauty Physics in the UK, 12/11/08Julie Kirk1 B-triggers at ATLAS Julie Kirk Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Introduction – B physics at LHC –
2003 Conference for Computing in High Energy and Nuclear Physics La Jolla, California Giovanna Lehmann - CERN EP/ATD The DataFlow of the ATLAS Trigger.
CHEP March 2003 Sarah Wheeler 1 Supervision of the ATLAS High Level Triggers Sarah Wheeler on behalf of the ATLAS Trigger/DAQ High Level Trigger.
Artemis School On Calibration and Performance of ATLAS Detectors Jörg Stelzer / David Berge.
Status of Monitoring in HLT ALgorithms Ricardo Gonçalo, RHUL – BNL Analysis Jamboree – Aug. 6, 2007.
ATLAS Trigger Development
Overview of the High-Level Trigger Electron and Photon Selection for the ATLAS Experiment at the LHC Ricardo Gonçalo, Royal Holloway University of London.
ATLAS T RIGGER P ERFORMANCE Ricardo Gonçalo Royal Holloway University of London On behalf of the ATLAS Collaboration LHC Days at Split, 4-8 October, 2010.
Status of the ATLAS first-level Central Trigger and the Muon Barrel Trigger and First Results from Cosmic-Ray Data David Berge (CERN-PH) for the ATLAS.
Kostas KORDAS INFN – Frascati 10th Topical Seminar on Innovative Particle & Radiation Detectors (IPRD06) Siena, 1-5 Oct The ATLAS Data Acquisition.
ATLAS and the Trigger System The ATLAS (A Toroidal LHC ApparatuS) Experiment is one of the four major experiments operating at the Large Hadron Collider.
Trigger Algorithms and Performance Ricardo Gonçalo, Royal Holloway ATLAS Overview Week - CERN 10 October 2007.
Performance of the ATLAS Trigger with Proton Collisions at the LHC John Baines (RAL) for the ATLAS Collaboration 1.
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.
ATLAS UK physics meeting, 10/01/08 1 Triggers for B physics Julie Kirk RAL Overview of B trigger strategy Algorithms – current status and plans Menus Efficiencies.
ATLAS B trigger Overview of B trigger Di-muon algorithms Performance (efficiency/rates) Menu for data taking experience 7/1/20101ATLAS UK Meeting,
Commissioning of the ATLAS High Level Trigger with Single Beam and Cosmic Rays 1.Review of HLT architecture 2.Tools needed for Commissioning 3.Operational.
EPS HEP 2007 Manchester -- Thilo Pauly July The ATLAS Level-1 Trigger Overview and Status Report including Cosmic-Ray Commissioning Thilo.
5/14/2018 The ATLAS Trigger and Data Acquisition Architecture & Status Benedetto Gorini CERN - Physics Department on behalf of the ATLAS TDAQ community.
Ricardo Gonçalo, RHUL BNL Analysis Jamboree – Aug. 6, 2007
Commissioning of the ATLAS High Level Trigger
ATLAS Canada Alberta Carleton McGill Montréal Simon Fraser Toronto
Trigger commissioning and early running strategy
The First-Level Trigger of ATLAS
12/3/2018 The ATLAS Trigger and Data Acquisition Architecture & Status Benedetto Gorini CERN - Physics Department on behalf of the ATLAS TDAQ community.
TDAQ commissioning and status Stephen Hillier, on behalf of TDAQ
1/2/2019 The ATLAS Trigger and Data Acquisition Architecture & Status Benedetto Gorini CERN - Physics Department on behalf of the ATLAS TDAQ community.
LHCb Trigger, Online and related Electronics
The LHCb Level 1 trigger LHC Symposium, October 27, 2001
Presentation transcript:

The ATLAS Trigger: High-Level Trigger Commissioning and Operation During Early Data Taking Ricardo Gonçalo, Royal Holloway University of London On behalf of the ATLAS TDAQ High-Level Trigger group EPS HEP2007 – Manchester, July 2007

Ricardo Goncalo, Royal Holloway University of London2 ATLAS HLT Operation in Early Running Outline The ATLAS High-Level Trigger  Overall system design  Selection algorithms and steering Trigger strategy for initial running  Trigger algorithm organisation  Trigger strategy for initial running  Status High-Level Trigger Commissioning  Technical runs  Cosmic-ray runs Summary and outlook

Ricardo Goncalo, Royal Holloway University of London3 ATLAS HLT Operation in Early Running The ATLAS High-Level Trigger

Ricardo Goncalo, Royal Holloway University of London4 ATLAS HLT Operation in Early Running HLTHLT 75 kHz 2 kHz 200 Hz 40 MHz RoI data LVL1 Acc. ROD LVL1 2.5  s Calorimeter Trigger Muon Trigger Event Builder EB 3 GB/s ROS ROB 120 GB/s Calo MuTrCh Other detectors 1 PB/s Event Filter EFP ~4sec EFN 300 MB/s LVL2 ~40ms L2P L2SV L2 N L2P ROIB LVL2 Acc. RoI’s Event Size ~1.5 MB CTP Pipelines 2.5  s EF Acc. (Region of Interest) RoI reques ts TriggerDAQ Three trigger levels: Level 1:  Hardware based  Calorimeter and muons only  Latency 2.5  s  Output rate ~75 kHz Level 2: ~500 farm nodes(*)  Only detector ”Regions of Interest” (RoI) processed - Seeded by level 1  Fast reconstruction  Average execution time ~40 ms(*)  Output rate up to ~2 kHz Event Builder: ~100 farm nodes(*) Event Filter (EF): ~1600 farm nodes(*)  Seeded by level 2  Potential full event access  Offline algorithms  Average execution time ~4 s(*)  Output rate up to ~200 Hz (*) 8CPU (four-core dual-socket farm nodes at ~2GHz

Ricardo Goncalo, Royal Holloway University of London5 ATLAS HLT Operation in Early Running match? Selection method EMROI L2 calorim. L2 tracking cluster? E.F.calorim. track? E.F.tracking track? e/  OK? Level 2 seeded by Level 1 Fast reconstruction algorithms Reconstruction within RoI Level1 Region of Interest is found and position in EM calorimeter is passed to Level 2 Ev.Filter seeded by Level 2 Offline reconstruction algorithms Refined alignment and calibration Event rejection possible at each step Electromagnetic clusters e/  reconst.

Ricardo Goncalo, Royal Holloway University of London6 ATLAS HLT Operation in Early Running Steering Algorithm execution managed by Steering  Based on static trigger configuration  And dynamic event data (RoIs, thresholds) Step-wise processing and early rejection  Chains stopped as soon as a step fails  Reconstruction step done only if earlier step successful  Event passes if at least one chain is successful Prescale (1 in N successful events allowed to pass) applied at end of each level Specialized algorithm classes for all situations  Topological: e.g. 2  with m  ~ m Z  Multi-objects: e.g. 4-jet trigger, etc… … match? EMROI L2 calorim. L2 tracking cluster? E.F.calorim. track? E.F.tracking track? e  OK? e/  reconst. L2 calorim. cluster? E.F.calorim.  OK? e/  reconst.

Trigger Strategy for Initial Running

Ricardo Goncalo, Royal Holloway University of London8 ATLAS HLT Operation in Early Running Trigger algorithms High-Level Trigger algorithms organised in groups (“slices”):  Minimum bias, e/ , , , jets, B physics, B tagging, E T miss, cosmics, plus combined- slice algorithms For commissioning  Cosmics slice used to exercise trigger – already started! For initial running:  Crucial to have minimum bias, e/ , , , jets  B physics will take advantage of initial low-lumi conditions (not bandwidth-critical) Lower event rate allow low transverse momentum thresholds needed for B physics  E T miss and B-jet tagging will require significant understanding of the detector Will need to understand trigger efficiencies and rates using real data  Zero bias triggers (passthrough)  Minimum bias: Coincidence in scintillators placed in front of calo. Counting inner-detector hits  Prescaled loose triggers  “Tag-and-probe” method, etc 1.Select good offline Z  /ee 2.Randomly select “tag” lepton; if triggered, use second lepton as “probe” 3.  = #(triggered probes)/#(all)

Ricardo Goncalo, Royal Holloway University of London9 ATLAS HLT Operation in Early Running Trigger strategy for initial running Major effort ongoing to design a complete trigger list (“menu”) for initial running  Commissioning of detector and trigger; early physics  Start with L= cm -2 s -1 benchmark and scale accordingly Many sources of uncertainty:  Background rate (dijet cross section uncertainty up to factor ~2)  Beam-related backgrounds  New detector: alignment, calibration, noise, Level 1 performance (calo isolation?), etc  Event occupancy Must be conservative and be prepared to face much higher rates than expected Need many “handles” to understand the trigger:  Many low-threshold, prescaled triggers, several High Level triggers will run in “pass- through” mode (take the event even if trigger rejects it)  Monitoring framework (embedded in algorithms, flexible and with small overheads)  Redundant triggers e.g. minimum bias selection with inner detector and with min.bias scintillators Expect the menu to evolve rapidly, especially once it faces real data

Ricardo Goncalo, Royal Holloway University of London10 ATLAS HLT Operation in Early Running Status Trigger information routinely available in simulated data  Trigger decision and reconstructed objects easily accessible in simulated data  Generated much work and feedback from physics groups Trigger decision can be re-played with different thresholds on already reconstructed data: important for optimisation of selection Tools being developed for trigger optimisation  Estimate efficiency, rate and overlaps  Need to be able to react quickly to changing luminosity conditions A draft menu exists with some 90 triggers  Much work is under way to optimise it and test it against the expected conditions Rates, efficiencies and overlap between selections being studied for the menu  Including misaligned detector in simulation  Including overlapped events per bunch crossing  Including natural cavern radiation (for muons)

High-Level Trigger Commissioning

Ricardo Goncalo, Royal Holloway University of London12 ATLAS HLT Operation in Early Running Mean 31.5 ms/event 98% L2 Average 40ms/ev available Technical runs A subset of the final High-Level Trigger CPU farm and DAQ system were exercised in “technical runs” Simulated (Level 1 triggered) Monte Carlo events in raw data format preloaded into DAQ readout buffers and distributed to farm nodes Realistic trigger list used (e/ , jets, , B physics, E T miss, cosmics)  HLT algorithms, steering, monitoring infrastructure, configuration database Measure/exercise:  Event latencies  Algorithm execution time  Monitoring framework  Configuration database  Network configuration  Run-control Data: 40% W/Z + 60% di-jets mean 94.3 ms/event Accepted events only

Ricardo Goncalo, Royal Holloway University of London13 ATLAS HLT Operation in Early Running Cosmics runs A section of the detector was used in cosmics runs (see previous talk) including:  Muon spectrometer  Tile (hadronic) calorimeter  LAr (electromagnetic) calorimeter  Inner detector The High-level was exercised successfully on real data in test cosmic runs.

Conclusions and outlook

Ricardo Goncalo, Royal Holloway University of London15 ATLAS HLT Operation in Early Running Conclusions and outlook The ATLAS High-Level Trigger is getting ready to face LHC data The final High-Level Trigger system was successfully exercised in technical runs on simulated data and was shown to be stable High-Level Trigger algorithms and machines took part in cosmics test runs Trigger information now routinely available in simulated data  Used for trigger optimisation Looking forward to triggering on LHC data next year!

Ricardo Goncalo, Royal Holloway University of London16 ATLAS HLT Operation in Early Running Backup slides

Ricardo Goncalo, Royal Holloway University of London17 ATLAS HLT Operation in Early Running USA15 SDX1 Gigabit Ethernet Event data requests Delete commands Requested event data Regions Of Interest LVL2 Super- visor Network switches Second- level trigger pROS ~ 500 stores LVL2 output LVL2 farm UX15 Read- Out Drivers ( RODs ) First- level trigger Dedicated links VME Data of events accepted by first-level trigger Read-Out Subsystems ( ROSs ) USA Read- Out Links RoI Builder ~150 PCs Event data ≤ 100 kHz, 1600 fragments of ~ 1 kByte each Timing Trigger Control (TTC) DataFlow Manager Event Filter (EF) ~1600 Network switches Event data pulled: partial ≤ 100 kHz, full ~ 3 kHz SDX1 dual-CPU nodes CERN computer centre Event rate ~ 200 Hz Data storage 6 Local Storage SubFarm Outputs (SFOs) ~100 Event Builder SubFarm Inputs (SFIs) Trigger / DAQ architecture

Ricardo Goncalo, Royal Holloway University of London18 ATLAS HLT Operation in Early Running Configuration Trigger configuration:  Active triggers  Their parameters  Prescale factors  Passthrough fractions  Consistent over three trigger levels Needed for:  Online running  Event simulation  Offline analysis Relational Database (TriggerDB) for online running  User interface (TriggerTool)  Browse trigger list (menu) through key  Read and write menu into XML format  Menu consistency checks After run, configuration becomes conditions data (Conditions Database)  For use in simulation & analysis

Ricardo Goncalo, Royal Holloway University of London19 ATLAS HLT Operation in Early Running Single-e Tr. Eff. (from Z  e + e - ) as a function of ,  and E T Misaligned Geometry Wrt. offline: Loose electron Tight electron

Ricardo Goncalo, Royal Holloway University of London20 ATLAS HLT Operation in Early Running Trigger efficiency from data Electron trigger efficiency from real Z  e + e - data: 1. Tag Z events with single electron trigger (e.g. e25i) 2. Count events with a second electron (2e25i) and m ee  m Z No dependence found on background level (5%, 20%, 50% tried) ~3% statistical uncertainty after 30 mins at initial luminosity Small estimated systematic uncertainty Method Ze+e-Ze+e- counting Level 2 efficiency87.0 % M Z (GeV)

Ricardo Goncalo, Royal Holloway University of London21 ATLAS HLT Operation in Early Running Triggerp T threshold(*)Obs  E T (jets) ?? E T miss 12, 20, 24, 32, 36, 44 Prescale E T miss 52, 72No presc J/  ee TopologicalB-phys    4 J/    TopologicalB-phys BsDsPhiPiTopologicalB-phys BXBX e + E T miss 18+12Prescale  + E T miss 15+12No presc Jet + E T miss 20+30No presc 2 Jets + E T miss 42+30No presc Jet+ E T miss +e No presc Jet+ E T miss +  No presc 4 Jet + e23+15No presc 4 Jet +  23+15No presc  + E T miss 15+32,25+32, 35+20,35+32  + e 10+10Express  +  10+6Express 2  + e 10+10Express Triggerp T threshold(*)Obs Electron5,10,15,Prescale Electron20,25,100No presc Di-electron5,10Prescale Di-electron15No presc Photon10,15,20Prescale Photon20No presc Di-photon10Prescale Di-photon20No presc Jets5,10,18,23,35,42,70Prescale Jets100No presc 3 Jets10,18B-tag 4 Jets10, 18B-tag 4 Jets23Express  10, 15, 20, 35 Di-  10+15,10+20,10+25 Muon4, 6, 10, 11, 15, 20, 40Muon spectr. Muon4, 6, 10, 11, 15, 20, 40ID+Muon Di-muon4, 6, 10, 15, 20Passtthr. ETET 100, 200, 304prescale ETET 380No presc

Ricardo Goncalo, Royal Holloway University of London22 ATLAS HLT Operation in Early Running