Muon momentum scale odd / even effects Peter Kluit, MATF/MCP meeting 23 October 1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Some MET studies Niels van Eldik and Peter Kluit 29 May
Advertisements

LHCb PatVeloTT Performance Adam Webber. Why Upgrade?  Currently we de-focus the beams o LHCb Luminosity ~ 2x10 32 cm -2 s -1 o ~ 1 interaction per bunch.
22/5/2011 Particle-ID and Tracking performance in CLIC_ILD1/27 CLIC_ILD particle identification and tracking performance J. Nardulli This talk in 2 parts:
Emily Thompson May 5 – UMass HEP Exp Group Meeting 1 Tag-probe method: Fitting Z → μ + μ - mass peaks Motivation: 1. Want to use long p T tail of muon.
Status of the MICE SciFi Simulation Edward McKigney Imperial College London.
Page 1 Calculating the Beam Position at the Ecal for DESY Run (Independent of Tracking) Hakan Yilmaz.
Status of  b Scan Jianchun Wang Syracuse University Representing L b scanners CLEO Meeting 05/11/02.
In order to acquire the full physics potential of the LHC, the ATLAS electromagnetic calorimeter must be able to efficiently identify photons and electrons.
MCP checks for the H-4l mass. Outline and work program The problems: – Higgs mass difference from the  – Possible single resonant peak mass shift (with.
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.
1 Tracking Reconstruction Norman A. Graf SLAC July 19, 2006.
NSW background studies Max Bellomo, Nektarios Benekos, Niels van Eldik, Andrew Haas, Peter Kluit, Jochen Meyer, Felix Rauscher 1.
IceCube: String 21 reconstruction Dmitry Chirkin, LBNL Presented by Spencer Klein LLH reconstruction algorithm Reconstruction of digital waveforms Muon.
Preliminary Study of CC-Inclusive Events in the P0D using Global Reconstruction Rajarshi Das (w/ Walter Toki) Nu-Mu Prelim. Meeting Dec 2010 CSU.
Energy loss improvements and tracking Niels van Eldik, Peter Kluit, Alan Poppleton, Andi Salzburger, Sharka Todorova Common Tracking Meeting 4 July 2013.
Optimising Cuts for HLT George Talbot Supervisor: Stewart Martin-Haugh.
19/07/20061 Nectarios Ch. Benekos 1, Rosy Nicolaidou 2, Stathes Paganis 3, Kirill Prokofiev 3 for the collaboration among: 1 Max-Planck-Institut für Physik,
International Workshop on Linear Colliders, Geneve Muon reconstruction and identification in the ILD detector N. D’Ascenzo, V.Saveliev.
Status of Muon Trigger Efficiency Measurement for ICHEP Benedikt Hegner, Benjamin Klein, Yvonne Küssel, Patricia Lobelle, Markus Marienfeld, Rahmat Rahmat,
Calibration of the CMS Electromagnetic Calorimeter with first LHC data
1 c. mills (Harvard U.) 20 September, 2010 W and Z Physics at ATLAS Corrinne Mills Harvard DOE Site Visit 20 September 2010.
LCWS 06 Bangalore, India, March Track fitting using weight matrix Nick Sinev, University of Oregon.
Study of neutrino oscillations with ANTARES J. Brunner.
Study of neutrino oscillations with ANTARES J. Brunner.
30/Jul/20101 Research of Z generation Ken-ichiro KOIKE.
Bartol Flux Calculation presented by Giles Barr, Oxford ICRR-Kashiwa December 2004.
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,
Detector alignment Stefania and Bepo Martellotti 20/12/10.
1 Detector Performance and Physics talks at Bern (very selective!) Pete Watkins.
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.:
1 OO Muon Reconstruction in ATLAS Michela Biglietti Univ. of Naples INFN/Naples Atlas offline software MuonSpectrometer reconstruction (Moore) Atlas combined.
The Detector Performance Study for the Barrel Section of the ATLAS Semiconductor Tracker (SCT) with Cosmic Rays Yoshikazu Nagai (Univ. of Tsukuba) For.
H C A L 11 th International Conference on Advanced Technology and Particle Physics Villa Olmo (Como - Italy), October 5 - 9, 2009 THE PERFORMANCE OF THE.
E. Devetak - IOP 081 Anomalous – from tools to physics Erik Devetak Oxford - RAL IOP 2008 Lancaster‏ Anomalous coupling (Motivation – Theory)
Muons at CalDet Introduction Track Finder Package ADC Corrections Drift Points Path Length Attenuation Strip-to-Strip Calibration Scintillator Response.
R. Castello (UC Louvain) on behalf of the Tracker alignment group The 2011 Tracker misalignment scenario CMS AlCa meeting Cern, 22/11/2011.
4/12/05 -Xiaojian Zhang, 1 UIUC paper review Introduction to Bc Event selection The blind analysis The final result The systematic error.
TeV muons: from data handling to new physics phenomena Vladimir Palichik JINR, Dubna NEC’2009 Varna, September 07-14, 2009.
CMS Cathode Strip Chambers Performance with LHC Data Vladimir Palichik JINR, Dubna NEC’2013 Varna, September 10,
I'm concerned that the OS requirement for the signal is inefficient as the charge of the TeV scale leptons can be easily mis-assigned. As a result we do.
Di-muon decays of J/ψ mesons and Z bosons have been used to study the muon reconstruction and identification efficiency of the ATLAS detector as a function.
H->WW->lνlν Analysis - Improvements and results - - Data and MC - Higgs Working group meeting, 6 January 2011 Magda Chełstowska & Rosemarie Aben.
The ATLAS Muon Landscape towards a common Muon Reconstruction Rosemarie Aben, Peter Kluit, John Ottersbach, Egge van der Poel, Marcel Raas, Nicole Ruckstuhl,
David Lange Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Muon reconstruction Peter Kluit Atlas NIKHEF Outing Hulsbeek.
Ftksim at high luminosity Monthly meeting September 22, 2008 Anton Kapliy.
C. Rogers, ASTeC Intense Beams Group Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
Hough-4-14.
L2 Muon Trigger Study Status Report
on behalf of ATLAS LAr Endcap Group
Time Independent Analysis
“Separation of Muons and Doubly Charged Particles using MDT”
Generator Study of Tevatron collider
Analysis Test Beam Pixel TPC
DT Local Reconstruction on CRAFT data
OO Muon Reconstruction in ATLAS
Charged PID in Arbor 23/02/2016 Dan YU.
Data Analysis in Particle Physics
Reconstruction of TauTau events
ALICE and the Little Bang
FLUCTUATIONS OF MUON ENERGY LOSSES
Transfer Line and CSC Rφ Reconstruction
Some basics about Cosmic CMS
A module in TrkFixup Gerry Lynch October 1, 2005
Samples and MC Selection
Contents First section: pion and proton misidentification probabilities as Loose or Tight Muons. Measurements using Jet-triggered data (from run).
Quarkonium production, offline monitoring, alignment & calibration
Study of MDC tuning.
A brief update on b-tagging of High P jets
A brief Update on secondary vertex tagged jets
Presentation transcript:

Muon momentum scale odd / even effects Peter Kluit, MATF/MCP meeting 23 October 1

The problem: odd even effects 2 The problem the scale factor for the MS derived from Z and J/psi data have large odd/even effects. The magnitude for the MS scale factor in the Barrel can go to Large-Small factor of so 6 per mille. The results for Staco can be found in the talk by Frederico on: aterialId=slides&confId= The next slide shows the crucial plot. Why is this result – from a complicated fit procedure - problematic? Basically because other plots on the Z show that the MS scale factor for odd/even is smaller than a per mille.

The problem: odd even effects 3 The odd/even effect in the MS scale factor can be observed in the up-down jumps in the Barrel.

Selections and data set 4 Data sets data12_8TeV.periodB.physics_Muons.PhysCont.AOD.t0pro13_v01/ Event selection MCP ID track selection For Zs muon pT > 25 and pT > 7 both combined muons For Jpsi pT muon pT > 7 GeV no cut both combined muons For SA quality cuts on SA track: 2 or more stations and phi hits Plots (if not specified otherwise) show Staco parameters.

CB parameters: Z cross checks 5 Vertically dM/M

CB parameters: Z cross checks 6 Projections for the Barrel (abs(eta) < 1.05) and Endcap (rest) As expected NO odd/even structure

SA parameters: Z cross checks 7 Vertically dM/M Here the SA parameters vs dM/M (SA,CB)

SA parameters: Z cross checks 8 Projections for the Barrel (abs(eta) < 1.05) and Endcap (rest) Here some structure for odd/even in Barrel. But the amplitude odd-even is on average only 1 per mille. NB it could be that part of the modulation is also predicted by the MC

CB parameters: Jpsi cross checks 9 Vertically dM/M

CB parameters: Jpsi cross checks 10 Projections for the Barrel (abs(eta) < 1.05) and Endcap (rest) As expected NO odd/even structure

SA parameters: Jpsi cross checks 11 Vertically dM/M Here the SA parameters vs dM/M (SA,CB)

SA parameters: Jpsi cross checks 12 Projections for the Barrel (abs(eta) < 1.05) and Endcap (rest) Here clear structure for odd/even in Barrel. The amplitude odd-even is on average 3 per mille. NB it could be that part of the modulation is also predicted by the MC

SA parameters: Jpsi cross checks pT > 10 GeV 13 Here clear structure for odd/even in Barrel. Amplitude is reduced to 1.5 per mille.

Conclusions 14 From the observations above one can conclude that the odd/even modulations are pT dependent. It is very likely that they are 1/pT suppressed: This is clear if one moves the cut on the muon momentum from 7 to 10 to 20. The amplitude of the odd-even modulation diminishes from 3 to 1 per mille. This means that the origin of the odd/even modulation comes from the energy loss in the odd and even sectors. This means further that the scale factor variations for the odd and even sectors that are apparent at high pT are on average well below 1 per mille. This issue is that the complicated fit that brings together the Jpsi and Z data gives out a large scale factor variation. This is definitely NOT right. The fit should have shown odd/even modulations in the Eloss so the constant term…