MuID LL1 Study (update) 09/02/2003 Muon Trigger Upgrade Meeting.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
VETO Analysis Update Michael Wood University of Massachusetts, Amherst Outline Introduction and basics Reconstruction packages Efficiencies Simulation.
Advertisements

Tentative flow chart of CMS Multi-Muon analysis 1 – DATASETS 2 - RESOLUTIONS 3 – FAKE RATES 4 – NUCLEAR INT MODEL 5 – IP TEMPLATES MODEL 6 – SAMPLE COMPOSITION.
Heavy flavor production in sqrt(s NN )=200 GeV d+Au Collisions at PHENIX DNP 2013 Matthew Wysocki, Oak Ridge National Lab Newport News, Virginia, Oct 25,
Invariant Mass Calculation J/ψ Rosi Reed 10/31/07.
Search for Long-Lived Particles at DØ Todd Adams Florida State University July 19, 2005 SUSY05 IPPP Durham.
Status of  b Scan Jianchun Wang Syracuse University Representing L b scanners CLEO Meeting 05/11/02.
MUID Status: General Detector Health In addition to two disabled HV chains there are four other chains (out of a total of 600) that are largely or totally.
A data-driven performance evaluation method for CMS RPC trigger system & Study of Muon trigger efficiencies with official Tag & Probe package for ICHEP.
W trigger upgrade simulation Kazuya Aoki Kyoto Univ. Muon Physics and Forward Upgrades Workshop Santa Fe, June 2004.
L3 Muon Trigger at D0 Status Report Thomas Hebbeker for Martin Wegner, RWTH Aachen, April 2002 The D0 muon system Functionality of the L3 muon trigger.
Andrew Glenn 4/21/02 Commissioning and Performance of the. Muon Identifier Andrew Glenn (University of Tennessee), for the PHENIX collaboration April APS.
Run11 MuTrig-FEE Summary RIKEN/RBRC Itaru Nakagawa 1.
Trigger processor John Huth Harvard. NSW + TGC of BW’s track fitting track position (R,  ) d  : deviation of incidence angle from infinite pT muons.
Darren Price – HLT B-trigger offline status report :: B-Physics meeting July 23 rd ‘08Page 1 HLT B-trigger offline monitoring status Darren Price, LANCASTER.
March 13, 2002 Daniel Whiteson L3 tracking - muons! Daniel Whiteson LBL.
NA60 Group meeting, 31 March 2005, Markus Keil1 Update on the pixel efficiencies in the Indium run 2003.
AMB HW LOW LEVEL SIMULATION VS HW OUTPUT G. Volpi, INFN Pisa.
Introduction to High Momentum Trigger in PHENIX Muon Arms RIKEN/RBRC Itaru Nakagawa 中川格 1.
A proposal for a Low mass electron pair trigger. Richard Seto University of CA, Riverside Trigger Working Group Meeting May 11, 2001.
Feb. 7, 2007First GLAST symposium1 Measuring the PSF and the energy resolution with the GLAST-LAT Calibration Unit Ph. Bruel on behalf of the beam test.
Trigger rate studying Shiuan-Hal,Shiu. Introduction  Because the DAQ data taking rate only have 1000Hz, we must confirm the trigger rate will not higher.
1 Pad Chamber Simulation Results for Muon Trigger Upgrade 10/13/2003 Muon Trigger Upgrade meeting.
PHENIX Measurement of Parity-Violating Single Spin Asymmetry in W Production in p+p Collisions at 500 GeV Stephen Pate (for the PHENIX Collaboration) New.
Performance of the PHENIX Muon Identifier Introduction Calibration with cosmic rays Performance in Au+Au collisions Summary Hiroki Sato, Kyoto University.
Offline Status Report A. Antonelli Summary presentation for KLOE General Meeting Outline: Reprocessing status DST production Data Quality MC production.
Performance of PHENIX High Momentum Muon Trigger.
CBM Simulation Walter F.J. Müller, GSI CBM Simulation Week, May 10-14, 2004 Tasks and Concepts.
5/9/111 Update on TMVA J. Bouchet. 5/9/112 What changed background and signal have increased statistic to recall, signal are (Kpi) pairs taken from single.
2012/7/231 Cosmic Ray at STAR Shuai Yang Center of Particle Physics and Technology University of Science and Technology of China STAR Regional Meeting.
STAR J/  Trigger in dA Manuel Calderon for the Heavy-Flavor Group Trigger Workshop at BNL October 21, 2002.
PERFORMANCE OF THE PHENIX SOUTH MUON ARM Kenneth F. Read Oak Ridge National Lab & University of Tennessee for the PHENIX Collaboration Quark Matter 2002.
1 Detector Performance and Physics talks at Bern (very selective!) Pete Watkins.
R&D for Muon Trigger Upgrade Naohito Saito (Kyoto/RIKEN/RBRC)
JPS/DNPY. Akiba Single Electron Spectra from Au+Au collisions at RHIC Y. Akiba (KEK) for PHENIX Collaboration.
Search for High-Mass Resonances in e + e - Jia Liu Madelyne Greene, Lana Muniz, Jane Nachtman Goal for the summer Searching for new particle Z’ --- a massive.
Performance of PHENIX High Momentum Muon Trigger.
Forward Trigger Upgrade and AuAu Pattern Recognition V. Cianciolo, D. Silvermyr Forward Upgrade Meeting August 18-19, 2004.
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.
1 EMCAL Reconstruction in Pass pp 900 GeV 29/03/2010 Gustavo Conesa Balbastre.
Status report - Tracking code - T.Gogami 9/30/2010.
David Silvermyr Lund University for the PHENIX Collaboration Early global event results using the PHENIX Pad Chambers at RHIC.
MuID Efficiency Study RIKEN/RBRC Itaru Nakagawa This analysis has been done by Sarah Caussin (ENSICAEN) 1.
1 HBD Update Itzhak Tserruya DC meeting, May 7, 2008 May7, 2008.
Run11 MuTrig Performance RIKEN/RBRC Itaru Nakagawa 1.
MuID Twopack Efficiencies: Measurements with Cosmic Rays & High Voltage inforamtion.
Comparison of different chamber configurations for the high luminosity upgrade of M2R2 G. Martellotti - LNF - 13/03/2015 Roma1 + Alessia.
Data vs MC … issues of the K +- group 1.Accidentals … contribution from Erika & Roberto 2.DC background.
M. Brooks, 28-Mar-02 Heavy/Light meeting 1 Muon Analysis Work Getting Code ready for first data pass - DONE Get ready for second pass on DSTs - muon identification.
06/22/04J. Lajoie – Santa Fe Muon Workshop1 Level-1 Triggers for Run-5 Outline –Vertex Triggers : BBC, ZDC (not discussed here) BBC will have ability.
Muon Arm Physics Program Past, Present + Future Patrick L. McGaughey Los Alamos National Laboratory Santa Fe June 17, 2003.
Jamaica 11 Jan.8, 2009 Muon Trigger Upgrade at PHENIX RIKEN/RBRC Itaru Nakagawa RIKEN/RBRC Itaru Nakagawa.
L0 trigger update Bruno Angelucci INFN & University of Pisa.
Software Update Takashi HACHIYA RIKEN 2012/2/10RIKEN VTX software meeting1.
Possible Improvement of MUID Performance Itaru Nakagawa, Seyoung Han (RIKEN, Ewha/RIKEN)
A 2 nd proposal for a Low mass electron pair trigger. Richard Seto University of CA, Riverside Trigger Working Group Meeting 6/7/2001.
H->WW->lνlν Analysis - Improvements and results - - Data and MC - Higgs Working group meeting, 6 January 2011 Magda Chełstowska & Rosemarie Aben.
Quark Matter 2002, July 18-24, Nantes, France Dimuon Production from Au-Au Collisions at Ming Xiong Liu Los Alamos National Laboratory (for the PHENIX.
Electron Trigger in PHENIX Kenta Shigaki (KEK) at PHENIX Heavy Flavor and Light Vector Meson Physics Working Group Meeting on March 9, 2000.
Muon Trigger Performance Run12 PP510GeV Sanghwa Park (SNU/RIKEN)
R.W. Assmann, V. Boccone, F. Cerutti, M. Huhtinen, A. Mereghetti
Update on the GRB Triggered Shower Analysis
Developments of the PWG3 muon analysis code
Checks of TOF Fiducial Cuts
Interactions of hadrons in the Si-W ECAL
Introduction to Functions
Data Analysis in Particle Physics
Objectives Graph ordered pairs in the coordinate plane.
TOF Fiducial Cut on 325 +/- 25 MeV/c (++ Field)
Objectives Graph ordered pairs in the coordinate plane.
Presentation transcript:

MuID LL1 Study (update) 09/02/2003 Muon Trigger Upgrade Meeting

Remaining issues from last meeting How much is the scale factor of the simulated minimum-bias events. What’s the efficiency after a certain symset boundary cut? Why MuIDLL1 Rejection Factor is so much lower in the latter runs ? Compare with MuID Blue Logic trigger, who’s rejection factor is higher ?

Efficiency and Rejection From Simulation Signal: p-p event contains muon decay from W. Pt(muon)>=1GeV Background: p-p minimum-bias event. Pt(muon)>1GeV. Scale factor = 68, i.e. 1 out of every 68 event are selected Eff no-cut +/-10 symset +/-20 symset +/-30 symset Deep 96.5% 96.2% 82.1% 55.5% shallow 99.6% 86.3%60.3% 29.1% RF no-cut +/-10 symset +/-20 symset +/-30 symset Deep 564  646+/ / /-1285 Shallow 231+/ / / /-272 Note: RF should be scale up by the scale factor.

Problems From Last Presentation Rejection factor in later run is significantly smaller than the early run. We checked runcontrol log and find the rejection factor of MuID Blue Logic is much more stable. The reason: The filtered files I used has some problem in trigger decision.

Introduction on MuID Blue Logic Trigger (from Hiroki) Each MuID plane is divided into 4 quadrants. Each quadrants is divided into 4 segment, i.e. 2 horizontal x 2 vertical. If the combination of hits in 4 gaps match certain pattern, i.e. online/monitoring/phnxmonitor/muid/pseudo_trig/pseudo_trig_const.h 7 out of 8 gap x orientation is required to have hits, i.e. 2-D cut.

Comparison of Rejection Factor of MuID Blue Logic Trigger Simulation and Real data MuID Blue Logic trigger simulator use run3-pp DST dMuiRaw as input to make thing easier to handle. The output is compared with Hiroki ‘s “offline/packages/mMuiPseudoTrigger.*” to make sure they give the same result. Rejection factor from real data is calculated according to runcontrol log. Run number Real South North Sim South 403± ±33 729± ± ± ± ± ± ±216 North 140 ± ± ±2 157 ±13 94 ±4 115 ± ±14 Run number Real South North Sim South 394±55 174±11 542±85 116±7 740± ±67 462± ± ±142 North 76± ±8 48±2 203 ± ± ± ±18

Rejection vs. Run Number For Deep Trigger

Why MuIDLL1 Rejection Factor is Smaller than MuID Blue Logic MuID Blue Logic Trigger requires 2-D cut. MuID LL1 trigger symset is 1-D. The following figure shows rejection factor after require 4 out of 8 gapXdirection instead of 7 out of 8 in MuID Blue Logic trigger, i.e. similar to 1-D cut.