Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 1 Ecal calibration using  0 Sabine Elles/ Marie-Noëlle Minard/ Gaël Rospabé.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
CBM Calorimeter System CBM collaboration meeting, October 2008 I.Korolko(ITEP, Moscow)
Advertisements

Status of CTB04 electron data vs MC analysis Stathes Paganis (Sheffield) Martin Aleksa (CERN) Isabelle Wingerter (LAPP) LAr Week, Cargnano, Italy 13-Sep-05.
STAR Status of J/  Trigger Simulations for d+Au Running Trigger Board Meeting Dec5, 2002 MC & TU.
Measurement of the absolute BR(K  +  -  + ) : an update Patrizia de Simone KLOE Kaon meeting – 21 May 2009.
1 N. Davidson E/p single hadron energy scale check with minimum bias events Jet Note 8 Meeting 15 th May 2007.
1 Update on Photons Graham W. Wilson Univ. of Kansas 1.More on  0 kinematic fit potential in hadronic events. 2.Further H-matrix studies (with Eric Benavidez).
LPC Jet/Met meeting 1/12/2006L. Perera1 Jet/Calorimeter Cluster Energy Corrections – Status Goal: To improve the individual jet energy determination based.
Status of calorimeter simulations Mikhail Prokudin, ITEP.
FMS review, Sep FPD/FMS: calibrations and offline reconstruction Measurements of inclusive  0 production Reconstruction algorithm - clustering.
Photon reconstruction and calorimeter software Mikhail Prokudin.
Intercalibration of the CMS Electromagnetic Calorimeter Using Neutral Pion Decays 1 M. Gataullin (California Institute of Technology) on behalf of the.
Pion test beam from KEK: momentum studies Data provided by Toho group: 2512 beam tracks D. Duchesneau April 27 th 2011 Track  x Track  y Base track positions.
Outline: (1) The data sample (2) Some news on the analysis method (3) Efficiency revised (4) Background revised (5) Data: spectrum + “phi-curve”
PHOS calibration in CDB framework M.Bogolyubsky, Y.Kharlov B.Polichtchouk, S.Sadovsky IHEP, Protvino ALICE off-line week 3 October 2005.
Calibration of the new Particle Identification Detector (PID) Tom Jude, Derek Glazier, Dan Watts.
Point Source Search with 2007 & 2008 data Claudio Bogazzi AWG videconference 03 / 09 / 2010.
Kali Calo progress report Dasha Savrina (ITEP/Moscow), Vanya Belyaev.
E. De LuciaNeutral and Charged Kaon Meeting – 7 May 2007 Updates on BR(K +  π + π 0 ) E. De Lucia.
28 June 2010 LHCb week St Petersburg M.N Minard 1 Calorimeter status Hardware status Controls & monitoring Timing alignment Calorimeters calibration Pending.
PHOS offline status report Dmitri Peressounko ALICE offline week,
M.N Minard Calorimeter Calibration scheme Calorimeter calibration procedure.
 0  5  Outline Event selection & analysis Background rejection Efficiencies Mass spectrum Comparison data-MC Branching ratio evaluation Systematics.
A Clustering Algorithm for LumiCal Halina Abramowicz, Ronen Ingbir, Sergey Kananov, Aharon Levy, Iftach Sadeh Tel Aviv University DESY Collaboration High.
M. Muniruzzaman University of California Riverside For PHENIX Collaboration Reconstruction of  Mesons in K + K - Channel for Au-Au Collisions at  s NN.
Jet Physics at CDF Sally Seidel University of New Mexico APS’99 24 March 1999.
Photon reconstruction and matching Prokudin Mikhail.
Calo preparation for 2015 Goals: -Trigger stability -Good calibration for HLT2 processing -Improved calibration ( timing, e/gamma response) for all calo.
Analysis of the dynamics of the decay  +  -  o Referees report Mario Antonelli, Luca Passalacqua KLOE general meeting
CALOR April Algorithms for the DØ Calorimeter Sophie Trincaz-Duvoid LPNHE – PARIS VI for the DØ collaboration  Calorimeter short description.
A bin-free Extended Maximum Likelihood Fit + Feldman-Cousins error analysis Peter Litchfield  A bin free Extended Maximum Likelihood method of fitting.
JPS 2003 in Sendai Measurement of spectral function in the decay 1. Motivation ~ Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment ~ 2. Event selection 3. mass.
Preliminary Measurement of the Ke3 Form Factor f + (t) M. Antonelli, M. Dreucci, C. Gatti Introduction: Form Factor Parametrization Fitting Function and.
D 0 reconstruction: 15 AGeV – 25 AGeV – 35 AGeV M.Deveaux, C.Dritsa, F.Rami IPHC Strasbourg / GSI Darmstadt Outline Motivation Simulation Tools Results.
Barbara Storaci, Wouter Hulsbergen, Nicola Serra, Niels Tuning 1.
Calo Calibration Meeting 29/04/2009 Plamen Hopchev, LAPP Calibration from π 0 with a converted photon.
QCD Background Estimation From Data Rob Duxfield, Dan Tovey University of Sheffield.
Development of the parallel TPC tracking Marian Ivanov CERN.
Layer00 Efficiency Studies Stephen Levy, UChicago.
Régis Lefèvre (LPC Clermont-Ferrand - France)ATLAS Physics Workshop - Lund - September 2001 In situ jet energy calibration General considerations The different.
December, Calibration of electromagnetic calorimeter of Hall A DVCS experiment Eric FUCHEY Ph.D Laboratoire de Physique Corpusculaire.
Paolo Massarotti Kaon meeting March 2007  ±  X    X  Time measurement use neutral vertex only in order to obtain a completely independent.
PAC questions and Simulations Peter Litchfield, August 27 th Extent to which MIPP/MINER A can help estimate far detector backgrounds by extrapolation.
Kali Calo progress report Dasha Savrina (ITEP/Moscow), Vanya Belyaev.
Electron and Photon HLT alley M. Witek K. Senderowska, A. Żurański.
LNF 12/12/06 1 F.Ambrosino-T. Capussela-F.Perfetto Update on        Dalitz plot slope Where we started from A big surprise Systematic checks.
1 Dead material correction status. Alexei Maslennikov, Guennadi Pospelov. Bratislava/Kosice/MPI Calorimeter Meeting. 8-December Problems with DM.
Monitoring Energy Gains Using the Double and Single Arm Compton Processes Yelena Prok PrimEx Collaboration Meeting March 18, 2006.
Status of Reconstruction Studies for a Realistic Detector Ron Cassell SiD Workshop Nov. 15, 2010.
Michele Faucci Giannelli
EZDC spectra reconstruction and calibration
Effect of t42 algorithm on jets
Event selection algorithm
Solving pedestal problem
Predrag Krstonosic - ILC Valencia
Ageing correction from electron
Muon momentum scale calibration with J/y peak
Radial Tail Resolution in the SELEX RICH A. Morelos, P. Cooper, J
Detector Configuration for Simulation (i)
Image Processing for Physical Data
2vtx tagged dijets mass resolution study
Status of ECAL Optimization Study
° status report analysis details: overview; “where we are”; plans: before finalizing result.. I.Larin 02/13/2009.
EM Linearity using calibration constants from Geant4
HyCal Energy Calibration using dedicated Compton runs
Using Single Photons for WIMP Searches at the ILC
Energy Calibration with Compton Data
Slope measurements from test-beam irradiations
Dilepton Mass. Progress report.
° status report analysis details: overview; “where we are”; plans: before finalizing result.. I.Larin 02/13/2009.
Status of the cross section analysis in e! e
Presentation transcript:

Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 1 Ecal calibration using  0 Sabine Elles/ Marie-Noëlle Minard/ Gaël Rospabé

Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 2 Outline  Sample   0 method  De-calibration  Re-calibration  Results  Perspectives

Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 3 Sample  MinBias 10 6 evts  Cf talk in december and next one : fisher for Ecal in stand alone  Cuts :  Pt  > 0.3GeV  Fisher (stand alone) > 0.15 => eliminate non photon clusters  Dist  1  2 eliminate bad combinatories  Gives ~1.8  0 /100events

Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 4 Cut effects Eff = 80% Rej = 50% Eff = 65% Rej = 80% Dist < 500mm Eff = 90% Rej = 95%

Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 5 Sample No corrections : -Shifted mass (124.6MeV) - large sigma (11MeV) - because no corrections applied  0 /100evts - S/B = 3 Applying corrections : Mass : 133.2MeV  = 9MeV With the L0 : - get 0.3/100evts - S/B = 3 => No need to apply it

Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 6 Calibration method Based on the disintegration  0 ->  Clusters : 2E 1 E 2 (1-cos  12 ) = m 2 00 E1and E2 deposited energy for each photon  12 angle between the 2  Most energetic cell into the cluster ( = seed) Because can bring bias (correlation between two corrections) In practice : i = index for cells into the cluster c i = calibration coefficient e i = deposited energy E 1(2) = C i,1(2) e i,1(2)  2E 1 E 2 (1-cos  ) = m 2   (correction) = m / m 00 C n+1 = C n *correction i,1(2) Where n is the iteration index

Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 7  Biases come from :  cells shared by several clusters  clusters between two regions of the Ecal  extended clusters  Solutions : adding others selections  only clusters with more than 70% of total energy into the seed  applying energy corrections only to the seed and taking into account other corrections on other cells  0.1<  0 mass < 0.17GeV : less than 20% of error  => 1  0 /100events Calibration selections

Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 8 Effects of the cuts on the clusters Cuts on Pt  > (0.3GeV), Fisher (> 0.15), Dist  1  2 < 500mm and % of total energy into the seed make us keeping compact clusters Without cuts Pt, dist, fisher cuts + seed cut

Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 9 Calibration Algorithm Cells grouped in 3x3 patterns for each region 9 random numbers for each region (vs Gaussian) Patterns reproduced along x & y axis cells de-calibrated in function of position in 3x3 patterns 2 consecutive cells with  de- calibration coefficients seed coefs only changed : no bias and correlations decalibration level can be chosen Detector de-calibration : Method : getting closer from “reality” (realistic data tacking and first mis-calibration) : de-calibration / re-calibration Outer Middle Inner

Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 10 Outer region Inner regionMiddle region De-calibration In each region : 9 coefficients => 9 distributions In total : mean=120MeV  = 26MeV (red =initial distributions) m=120MeV  = 26MeV

Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 11 Calibration algorithm Detector calibration : Different parameter evolutions are checked : mean (mass), sigma of mass distributions, and dispersions for each region  when for a given region stop criteria (see next transparencies) are satisfied : stop to re-calibrate this region and only going on for non-re-calibrated ones Distribution of calibration coefs : 9 distributions / region Nowadays: - a  0 is randomly selected into the sample - fill the dedicated histogram ( position into the 3x3 pattern) with it’s reconstructed mass - when one contains 1000  0 : Gaussian fit => gives mean value : m which is m 2 = 2E 1 E 2 (1-cos  12 ) - correction is calculated : - the correction is applied giving 2E’ 1 E’ 2 (1-cos  ) closer to m 2 00 m m  = 00

Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 12 Coefficient re-adjustment 9 examples of distributions of the mean : - not very Gaussian - not centered on m - distributions fitted by a Gaussian - give us the correction to apply on the cell(s)

Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 13Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 13 How to stop/evolution of the calibration 3 variables to check : - evolution of the mean of the distributions - the  of the distribution - the dispersion Dispersion (Disp) is defined by : Disp = (mean – m bin ) 2 x Bin content Stop iterative process for one region when system stables over 4 quantities (0.1%) : -Correction factors - mean, -  and dispersion for global distribution and for each region  bin

Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 14 How to stop/evolution of the calibration Oscillations of the mean : - over-corrected - corrected Diminution of the mean and dispersion Inner oscillates more than other regions Middle stabilizes faster than others

Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 15 Results for the total Ecal m=135 MeV  = 9 MeV m i = 120MeV Even if it looks well calibrate d before the end it is not !! Because of the addition of the 3 regions

Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 16 Results for the total Ecal m=135 MeV  = 10 MeV m=135 MeV  = 8 MeV m=135 MeV  = 11 MeV

Gael Rospabe Lapp 15/04/08 CaloSoft Meeting 17 Conclusions  Iterative method : correction of the mass  obtain resolution of 1% on each cell  Time 1753 seconds (~1/2h)  CPU seconds (~5mins)*2000/9=18h  Number of iterations : ~200  # of needed  0 = 1000/cell => ~10 7  0  with Fisher and selections 1.  0 /100evts => evts  Calibration time and iterations function of de- calibration