CC ANALYSIS STUDIES Andy Blake Cambridge University Fermilab, September 2006.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Possible directions for NC sensitivity Philip Rodrigues April 2008 Minos collaboration meeting, Sussex.
Advertisements

HARP Anselmo Cervera Villanueva University of Geneva (Switzerland) K2K Neutrino CH Meeting Neuchâtel, June 21-22, 2004.
Expected Sensitivity of the NO A  Disappearance Analysis Kirk Bays (Caltech) for the NO A Collaboration April 14, 2013 APS DPF Denver Kirk Bays, APS DPF.
N. Saoulidou Fermilab 1 Update on track reconstruction in the Near Detector N. Saoulidou, Fermilab
Reconstruction Issues in Cosmic Ray Muons Maury Goodman/Gavril Giurgiu & Jurgen Reichenbacher.
Off-axis Simulations Peter Litchfield, Minnesota  What has been simulated?  Will the experiment work?  Can we choose a technology based on simulations?
1 N. Davidson E/p single hadron energy scale check with minimum bias events Jet Note 8 Meeting 15 th May 2007.
CC analysis progress This talk: –A first attempt at calculating CC energy sensitivity using the Far Mock data MC files with full reconstruction. –Quite.
Andy Blake Cambridge University Wednesday June 13 th 2007 Combined Atmospheric Analysis: Study of 6 Month’s Data.
Searching for Atmospheric Neutrino Oscillations at MINOS Andy Blake Cambridge University April 2004.
Top Turns Ten March 2 nd, Measurement of the Top Quark Mass The Low Bias Template Method using Lepton + jets events Kevin Black, Meenakshi Narain.
Kevin Black Meenakshi Narain Boston University
SpillServer and FD neutrino events As part of my CC analysis studies, I have been attempting to isolate beam neutrino candidates in the FD using both scanning.
1 First look at new MC files First look at reconstruction output from the newly- generated “mock-data” MC files. –These contain the following improvements:
First Observations of Separated Atmospheric  and  Events in the MINOS Detector. A. S. T. Blake* (for the MINOS collaboration) *Cavendish Laboratory,
Atmospheric Neutrino Event Reconstruction Andy Blake Cambridge University June 2004.
Far Detector Fiducial Volume Studies Andy Blake Cambridge University Saturday February 24 th 2007.
2015/6/23 1 How to Extrapolate a Neutrino Spectrum to a Far Detector Alfons Weber (Oxford/RAL) NF International Scoping Study, RAL 27 th April 2006.
NuMI Offaxis Near Detector and Backgrounds Stanley Wojcicki Stanford University Cambridge Offaxis workshop January 12, 2004.
Partially Contained Atmospheric Neutrino Analysis Andy Blake Cambridge University March 2004.
Atmospheric Neutrino Event Reconstruction Andy Blake Cambridge University September 2003.
Multiple Muons at the Far Detector Andy Blake Cambridge University Fermilab, December 2006.
1 CC update –  momentum resolution Software news: –Converted code to read Sue’s ntuples. Allows use of Chris’s analysis framework (including event display)
CC/NC SEPARATION STUDY Andy Blake Cambridge University Friday February 23 rd 2007.
1 CC analysis update New analysis of SK atm. data –Somewhat lower best-fit value of  m 2 –Implications for CC analysis – 5 year plan plots revisited Effect.
FD event selection and data/MC comparisons Motivation of this study –Look at FD events (with blinding scheme imposed) to determine Whether we observe neutrino.
Neutrino Event Reconstruction Andy Blake Cambridge University September 2003.
Partially Contained Atmospheric Neutrino Analysis Andy Blake + John Chapman Cambridge University January 2004.
Far Detector Fiducial Volume Study Andy Blake Cambridge University Thursday December 7 th 2006.
Identification of neutrino oscillations in the MINOS detector Daniel Cole
Measurement of B (D + →μ + ν μ ) and the Pseudoscalar Decay Constant f D at CLEO István Dankó Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute representing the CLEO Collaboration.
10/24/2005Zelimir Djurcic-PANIC05-Santa Fe Zelimir Djurcic Physics Department Columbia University Backgrounds in Backgrounds in neutrino appearance signal.
P. Vahle, Fermilab Oct An Alternate Approach to the CC Measurement— Predicting the FD Spectrum Patricia Vahle University College London Fermilab.
Current Status of Hadron Analysis Introduction Hadron PID by PHENIX-TOF  Current status of charged hadron PID  CGL and track projection point on TOF.
Preliminary Study of CC-Inclusive Events in the P0D using Global Reconstruction Rajarshi Das (w/ Walter Toki) Nu-Mu Prelim. Meeting Dec 2010 CSU.
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.
Latest Results from The MINOS Experiment
Accelerator neutrino interactions in the MINOS Experiment Krzysztof Wojciech Fornalski Warszawa 3.XII.2007.
N. Saoulidou Fermilab 1 Status & Update of track reconstruction in the Near Detector N. Saoulidou, Fermilab
Latest Results from the MINOS Experiment Justin Evans, University College London for the MINOS Collaboration NOW th September 2008.
Search for Electron Neutrino Appearance in MINOS Mhair Orchanian California Institute of Technology On behalf of the MINOS Collaboration DPF 2011 Meeting.
1 Performance of a Magnetised Scintillating Detector for a Neutrino Factory Scoping Study Meeting Rutherford Appleton Lab Tuesday 25 th April 2006 M. Ellis.
Mass Hierarchy Study with MINOS Far Detector Atmospheric Neutrinos Xinjie Qiu 1, Andy Blake 2, Luke A. Corwin 3, Alec Habig 4, Stuart Mufso 3, Stan Wojcicki.
First Look at Data and MC Comparisons for Cedar and Birch ● Comparisons of physics quantities for CC events with permutations of Cedar, Birch, Data and.
N. Saoulidou, Fermilab, MINOS Collaboration Meeting N. Saoulidou, Fermilab, ND/CC Parallel Session, MINOS Collaboration Meeting R1.18.
Cedar and pre-Daikon Validation ● CC PID parameter based CC sample selections with Birch, Cedar, Carrot and pre-Daikon. ● Cedar validation for use with.
The inсlusive produсtion of the meson resonanсes ρ 0 (770), K * (892), f 0 (980), f 2 (1270) in neutrino- nuсleon сharged сurrent (CC) interaсtions Polyarush.
Optimization of Analysis Cuts for Oscillation Parameters Andrew Culling, Cambridge University HEP Group.
Beam Extrapolation Fit Peter Litchfield  An update on the method I described at the September meeting  Objective;  To fit all data, nc and cc combined,
A bin-free Extended Maximum Likelihood Fit + Feldman-Cousins error analysis Peter Litchfield  A bin free Extended Maximum Likelihood method of fitting.
Mark Dorman UCL/RAL MINOS Collaboration Meeting Fermilab, Oct. 05 Data/MC Comparisons and Estimating the ND Flux with QE Events ● Update on QE event selection.
Study of the ND Data/MC for the CC analysis October 14, 2005 MINOS collaboration meeting M.Ishitsuka Indiana University.
Medium baseline neutrino oscillation searches Andrew Bazarko, Princeton University Les Houches, 20 June 2001 LSND: MeVdecay at rest MeVdecay in flight.
Low Z Detector Simulations
Search for diffuse cosmic neutrino fluxes with the ANTARES detector Vladimir Kulikovskiy The ANTARES Collaboration 3-9 August 2014ANTARES diffuse flux.
Scan Rules Introduction –Overview –Justification –Approach Neutrino Event Type Assignment –Strategy –Muon-Flavor Reaction (mu) Type –Electron-Flavor Reaction.
Progress Report on GEANT Study of Containerized Detectors R. Ray 7/11/03 What’s New Since Last Time?  More detailed container description in GEANT o Slightly.
A different cc/nc oscillation analysis Peter Litchfield  The Idea:  Translate near detector events to the far detector event-by-event, incorporating.
MINOS Coll Meet. Oxford, Jan CC/NC Data Cross Checks Thomas Osiecki University of Texas at Austin.
Search for active neutrino disappearance using neutral-current interactions in the MINOS long-baseline experiment 2008/07/31 Tomonori Kusano Tohoku University.
Measuring Oscillation Parameters Four different Hadron Production models  Four predicted Far  CC spectrum.
September 10, 2002M. Fechner1 Energy reconstruction in quasi elastic events unfolding physics and detector effects M. Fechner, Ecole Normale Supérieure.
PAC questions and Simulations Peter Litchfield, August 27 th Extent to which MIPP/MINER A can help estimate far detector backgrounds by extrapolation.
Extrapolation Techniques  Four different techniques have been used to extrapolate near detector data to the far detector to predict the neutrino energy.
Observation Gamma rays from neutral current quasi-elastic in the T2K experiment Huang Kunxian for half of T2K collaboration Mar. 24, Univ.
 CC QE results from the NOvA prototype detector Jarek Nowak and Minerba Betancourt.
Mark Dorman UCL/RAL MINOS WITW June 05 An Update on Using QE Events to Estimate the Neutrino Flux and Some Preliminary Data/MC Comparisons for a QE Enriched.
Neutral Current Interactions in MINOS Alexandre Sousa, University of Oxford for the MINOS Collaboration Neutrino Events in MINOS Neutrino interactions.
Preliminary T2K beam simulation using the G4 2km detector
L/E analysis of the atmospheric neutrino data from Super-Kamiokande
Presentation transcript:

CC ANALYSIS STUDIES Andy Blake Cambridge University Fermilab, September 2006

Overview Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 2 Have started to look at some CC analysis issues. – Validation of R1.24. – Study the current reconstruction + analysis. Long term goal is to optimize the measurement of sin 2 2  23. – Need to accurately resolve the size of the oscillation dip. – Need a clean event sample. (good CC/NC separation, good energy resolution, few reconstruction errors etc…) This talk is divided into the following topics: (I) energy reconstruction. (II) CC/NC separation.

Data Selection Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 3 Far Detector beam Monte Carlo SR ntuples (R1.24c). ~75,000 beam events. Apply simple pre-selection to reconstructed events: 1 event per snarl (avoid split events for now). >10 digits per event (below tracking threshold). signature of  CC interaction is reconstructed track. Define fiducial volume: 50 cm from edge of detector. 40 cm from centre of coil hole. 5 planes from beginning of detector 5 planes either side of super-module gap. 20 planes from end of detector.

(I) Energy Reconstruction

Event Reconstruction Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 5 Muon Reconstruction: Define longest track to be primary track. FC events: both vertex and end inside fiducial volume. use momentum from range. PC events: vertex inside fiducial volume. end not inside fiducial volume. use momentum from curvature. Shower Reconstruction: Collect up all sub-showers close to the event vertex. Add in unassigned strips not along primary track. Neutrino Energy: neutrino energy = muon momentum + shower energy.

Shower Reconstruction Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 6 associated with hadronic shower associated with muon track a sub-shower is associated with vertex shower if: Z shw -Z evt 0.5 GeV OR shower not on track.

Shower Reconstruction an unassigned strips are associated with vertex shower if: PH east +PH west >200 ADCs AND strips not adjacent to track. ( Approximate 10,000 SigCor ~ 1 GeV for these strips). Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 7

Reconstruction Efficiencies Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 8 MUON TRACK RECONSTRUCTIONSHOWER RECONSTRUCTION # events with tracks # events efficiency = # events with shower energy # events with tracks efficiency = Reconstruction efficiencies for  CC events (true vertex inside fiducial volume):

Reconstruction Efficiencies Event (1) P  = 500 MeV Event (2) P  = 500 MeV Event (3) P  = 700 MeVEvent (4) P  = 600 MeV Examples of  CC events without reconstructed tracks: blue line = true muon direction

Muon Momentum From Range Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide GeV 1-2 GeV 2-3 GeV 3-4 GeV 4-5 GeV bias towards high energies due to track reconstruction (N.B: used to be much worse!) bias towards low energies due to track containment and showers at end of track. momentum reconstruction consistent with ~5% error. reco - true muon momentum for 1 GeV wide bins: MUON MOMENTUM FROM RANGE

Muon Momentum From Range R1.18.2R1.24c The bias at low muon energies has always existed! Caused by over-tracking and/or mis-tracking (track finder prefers longer tracks) Bias is reduced by the introduction of the new track finder in R1.24c. Bias is worse in shower-like events, so will be correlated with PID parameter. Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 11

Muon Momentum from Range Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 12 true muon direction = blue line (3) wrong track picked(4) wrong track picked (2) track extended past vertex(1) track deviates off course

Muon Momentum from Curvature Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide GeV 1-2 GeV 2-3 GeV 3-4 GeV 4-5 GeV reco - true muon momentum for 1 GeV wide bins: MUON MOMENTUM FROM CURVATURE Muon momentum resolution is ~ 10-20%, but there are low/high energy tails

Muon Momentum from Curvature Feed down of high energy neutrinos into low energy bins: Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 14 PC events with: P reco < 3 GeV Out-lying tail of high energy muons reconstructed with a low energy (true muon momentum)

Muon Momentum from Curvature Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 15 (1) (2)(3) Feed down of high energy neutrinos into low energy bins for PC events: P true = 9.9 GeV P reco = 0.5 ± 0.1 GeV P true = 8.4 GeV P reco = 1.8 ± 0.8 GeV P true = 14.3 GeV P reco = 1.5 ± 0.5 GeV

Shower Energy Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide GeV 1-2 GeV 2-3 GeV 3-4 GeV 4-5 GeV Reconstructed energy peaks in correct place and resolution is consistent with 55%/√E reco - true shower energy for 1 GeV wide energy bins: RECONSTRUCTED SHOWER ENERGY

Neutrino Energy Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide GeV 1-2 GeV 2-3 GeV3-4 GeV 4-5 GeV RECONSTRUCTED NEUTRINO ENERGY reco - true neutrino energy for 1 GeV wide energy bins:

Neutrino Energy Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 18 R1.24c R1.18.2

Neutrino Energy Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 19 Look at feed down of high energy neutrinos into low energy bins: All events with E reco < 3 GeV The feed down from high energy PC events well below 1% level.

Energy Resolution Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 20 FC events:  E = 5% P   55%/√E shw PC events:  E =  q/p /(q/p) 2  55%/√E shw define an approximate resolution function for FC and PC  CC events: FC PC

Neutrino Energy Resolution Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 21 Divide up events by estimated neutrino energy resolution:

Energy Resolution Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 22  E /E < 15%15% <  E /E < 30% 30% <  E /E < 60%  E /E > 60% oscillations close to zero!  m 2 = 2.74 eV 2 sin 2 2  = 1.0 Note: NC background not included!

(II) CC/NC Separation

CC/NC Separation (1) Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 24 Start with standard PID variables. Track PlanesTrack PH / Event PHTrack PH / Track Planes CC NC

CC/NC Separation (1) Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide % CC entries Form the PID using standard prescription: CC NC

CC/NC Separation (1) Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 26 3 variables PID = - 0.2

CC/NC Separation (2) Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 27 “Track-like” planes (number of planes with little shower activity) Error in track fit | Q/p | /  Q/p (test of consistency with muon track fit) CC NC Choose some additional variables: (i) Reasonable physics motivation. (ii) Good separation of CC and NC events. (iii) Fairly similar in Near and Far Detector (e.g. can’t use timing). 50 planes CC NC

CC/NC Separation (2) Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 28 5 variables 3 variables PID = - 0.2

CC/NC Separation (3) Divide up PID distributions by track length. (i) track planes < 25 (ii) 25 < track planes < 50 (iii) track planes > 50 Use the difference in the shape of the PID distributions as a function of track length to enhance the CC/NC separation at low neutrino energies. (i) ~100% of tracks with >50 planes are CC events. (ii) distributions of track PH / event PH change markedly for short tracks. (iii) track-like planes + fit error provide some separation at low energies. Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 29

CC/NC Separation (3) Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 30 CCNC separation from pulse height has almost all gone PID variables for muon tracks spanning less than 25 planes: Some separation from track-like planes some separation from track curvature

CC/NC Separation (3) Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 31 5 variables 3 variables 5 variables + separation by event length PID = Events with: E reco < 3 GeV

Summary Andy Blake, Cambridge UniversityCC talk, slide 32 Reconstruction appears to be in pretty good shape. – Energy reconstruction is accurate with good resolution. – Some small problems and biases, but very hard to handle. – Only a small number of outlying events fall into oscillation region. Oscillation dip is better resolved by dividing events by resolution. – This may improve the measurement of sin 2 2  23. Some improvement possible in CC/NC separation. – ~10% improvement in selection efficiency at low energies. Lots more work for me to do!