Interactions of hadrons in the SiW ECAL Towards paper Naomi van der Kolk.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Proposal for a new design of LumiCal R. Ingbir, P. Ruzicka, V. Vrba October 07 Malá Skála.
Advertisements

Electromagnetic shower in the AHCAL selection criteria data / MonteCarlo comparison of: handling linearity shower shapes CALICE collaboration meeting may.
April 19th, 2010Philippe Doublet (LAL) Hadronic showers in the SiW ECAL (with 2008 FNAL data) Philippe Doublet.
1 Calice Meeting Lyon 16/09/09Tak Goto + DRW Analysis of pion showers in the ECAL from CERN Oct 2007 Data Takuma Goto (+David Ward)  We study the properties.
Simulation of the RPC Response José Repond Argonne National Laboratory CALICE Collaboration Meeting University Hassan II Casablanca, Morocco September.
Adding electronic noise and pedestals to the CALICE simulation LCWS 19 – 23 rd April Catherine Fry (working with D Bowerman) Imperial College London.
Interactions of hadrons in the SiW ECAL (CAN-025) Philippe Doublet - LAL Roman Pöschl, François Richard - LAL CALICE Meeting at Casablanca, September 22nd.
June 6 th, 2011 N. Cartiglia 1 “Measurement of the pp inelastic cross section using pile-up events with the CMS detector” How to use pile-up.
Calorimeter1 Understanding the Performance of CMS Calorimeter Seema Sharma,TIFR (On behalf of CMS HCAL)
1 Study of the Tail Catcher Muon Tracker (TCMT) Scintillator Strips and Leakage with Simulated Coil Rick Salcido Northern Illinois University For CALICE.
Single Particle Energy Resolution Vishnu V. Zutshi.
1 N. Davidson E/p single hadron energy scale check with minimum bias events Jet Note 8 Meeting 15 th May 2007.
1 N. Davidson, E. Barberio E/p single hadron energy scale check with minimum bias event Hadronic Calibration Workshop 26 th -27 th April 2007.
1 Calice Analysis Meeting 13/02/07David Ward Just a collection of thoughts to guide us in planning electron analysis In order to end up with a coherent.
Michele Faucci Giannelli TILC09, Tsukuba, 18 April 2009 SiW Electromagnetic Calorimeter Testbeam results.
Evaluation of G4 Releases in CMS (Sub-detector Studies) Software used Electrons in Tracker Photons in the Electromagnetic Calorimeter Pions in the Calorimeter.
LCG Meeting, May 14th 2003 V. Daniel Elvira1 G4 (OSCAR_1_4_0) Validation of CMS HCal V. Daniel Elvira Fermilab.
Interactions of pions in the Si-W ECAL prototype Towards a paper Naomi van der Kolk.
Preliminary comparison of ATLAS Combined test-beam data with G4: pions in calorimetric system Andrea Dotti, Per Johansson Physics Validation of LHC Simulation.
The CALICE Si-W ECAL - physics prototype 2012/Apr/25 Tamaki Yoshioka (Kyushu University) Roman Poschl (LAL Orsay)
DHCAL - Resolution (S)DHCAL Meeting January 15, 2014 Lyon, France Burak Bilki, José Repond and Lei Xia Argonne National Laboratory.
Optimising Cuts for HLT George Talbot Supervisor: Stewart Martin-Haugh.
Tests of a Digital Hadron Calorimeter José Repond Argonne National Laboratory CALICE Collaboration Meeting March 10 – 12, 2010 University of Texas at Arlington.
Event Reconstruction in SiD02 with a Dual Readout Calorimeter Detector Geometry EM Calibration Cerenkov/Scintillator Correction Jet Reconstruction Performance.
1 Calice UK Meeting 27/03/07David Ward Plans; timescales for having analysis results for LCWS Status of current MC/data reconstruction Reconstruction status;
Pion Showers in Highly Granular Calorimeters Jaroslav Cvach on behalf of the CALICE Collaboration Institute of Physics of the ASCR, Na Slovance 2, CZ -
CALICE Digital Hadron Calorimeter: Calibration and Response to Pions and Positrons International Workshop on Future Linear Colliders LCWS 2013 November.
PFA Template Concept Performance Mip Track and Interaction Point ID Cluster Pointing Algorithm Single Particle Tests of PFA Algorithms S. Magill ANL.
Development of a Particle Flow Algorithms (PFA) at Argonne Presented by Lei Xia ANL - HEP.
January 21, 2007Suvadeep Bose / IndiaCMS - Santiniketan 1 Response of CMS Hadron Calorimeter to Electron Beams Suvadeep Bose EHEP, TIFR, Mumbai Outline:
May 3rd, 2010Philippe Doublet (LAL) Hadronic interactions in the SiW ECAL (with the 2008 data) Philippe Doublet, Michele Faucci-Giannelli, Roman Pöschl,
W-DHCAL Analysis Overview José Repond Argonne National Laboratory.
Positional and Angular Resolution of the CALICE Pre-Prototype ECAL Hakan Yilmaz.
ECAL PID1 Particle identification in ECAL Yuri Kharlov, Alexander Artamonov IHEP, Protvino CBM collaboration meeting
PFAs – A Critical Look Where Does (my) SiD PFA go Wrong? S. R. Magill ANL ALCPG 10/04/07.
13 July 2005 ACFA8 Gamma Finding procedure for Realistic PFA T.Fujikawa(Tohoku Univ.), M-C. Chang(Tohoku Univ.), K.Fujii(KEK), A.Miyamoto(KEK), S.Yamashita(ICEPP),
1 The CALICE experiment at MTBF (FNAL) summary of a fruitful test beam experiment Erika Garutti (DESY) On behalf of CALICE.
Min-DHCAL: Measurements with Pions Benjamin Freund and José Repond Argonne National Laboratory CALICE Collaboration Meeting Max-Planck-Institute, Munich.
CALICE Tungsten HCAL Prototype status Erika Garutti Wolfgang Klempt Erik van der Kraaij CERN LCD International Workshop on Linear Colliders 2010, October.
5-9 June 2006Erika Garutti - CALOR CALICE scintillator HCAL commissioning experience and test beam program Erika Garutti On behalf of the CALICE.
Custom mechanical sensor support (left and below) allows up to six sensors to be stacked at precise positions relative to each other in beam The e+e- international.
STAR Analysis Meeting, BNL – oct 2002 Alexandre A. P. Suaide Wayne State University Slide 1 EMC update Status of EMC analysis –Calibration –Transverse.
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.
Calice Meeting Argonne Muon identification with the hadron calorimeter Nicola D’Ascenzo.
1 IWLC 2010 Geneva Oct.’10David Ward Tests of GEANT4 using the CALICE calorimeters David Ward  Electromagnetic particles (, e) were used to understand.
Lucia Bortko | Optimisation Studies for the BeamCal Design | | IFJ PAN Krakow | Page 1/16 Optimisation Studies for the BeamCal Design Lucia.
Interactions of hadrons in the SiW ECAL (CAN-025) Philippe Doublet - LAL Roman Pöschl, François Richard - LAL SiW ECAL Meeting at LLR, February 8th 2011.
OUTGOING NEUTRONS IN CALET CALET AIMS AT DETECTING UHE CR ELECTRONS HIGH REJECTION FACTOR FOR PROTONS/NUCLEI NEEDED POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENT RESPECT ‘STANDARD’
18 Sep 2008Paul Dauncey 1 DECAL: Motivation Hence, number of charged particles is an intrinsically better measure than the energy deposited Clearest with.
Testbeam analysis Lesya Shchutska. 2 beam telescope ECAL trigger  Prototype: short bars (3×7.35×114 mm 3 ), W absorber, 21 layer, 18 X 0  Readout: Signal.
Manqi Ruan Discussing & Support: Roman, Francois, Vincent, Supervisor: Z. ZHANG (LAL) & Y. GAO (Tsinghua)) DQ Check for CERN Test.
Energy Reconstruction in the CALICE Fe-AHCal in Analog and Digital Mode Fe-AHCal testbeam CERN 2007 Coralie Neubüser CALICE Collaboration meeting Argonne,
Interactions of pions in the Si-W ECAL prototype Towards a paper Naomi van der Kolk.
 reconstruction and identification in CMS A.Nikitenko, Imperial College. LHC Days in Split 1.
DESY BT analysis - updates - S. Uozumi Dec-12 th 2011 ScECAL meeting.
ECAL Interaction layer PFA Template Track/CalCluster Association Track extrapolation Mip finding Shower interaction point Shower cluster pointing Shower.
Shower Fractal Dimensional Analysis at PFA Oriented Calorimeter
CALICE Collaboration Meeting Sept Roman Pöschl LAL Orsay - Data Collected with the Ecal - Ecal in July running - Collected Data and Glimpse on Quality.
An update on ECAL simulations
Michele Faucci Giannelli
or getting rid of the give-away particles in a test-beam environment
CALICE scintillator HCAL
Interactions of hadrons in the Si-W ECAL
Observation of Diffractively Produced W- and Z-Bosons
Plans for checking hadronic energy
Rick Salcido Northern Illinois University For CALICE Collaboration
Argonne National Laboratory
Michele Faucci Giannelli
Observation of Diffractively Produced W- and Z-Bosons
Rick Salcido Northern Illinois University For CALICE Collaboration
Presentation transcript:

Interactions of hadrons in the SiW ECAL Towards paper Naomi van der Kolk

Aim CALICE Analysis Note CAN-025: Study the interactions of π - in the SiW ECAL at low energies (2 – 10 GeV) and compare various Monte Carlo Models (physics lists) to this data Check and revise the analysis presented in the Analysis Note on the FNAL 2008 SiW ECAL testbeam data and prepare the publication 03/06/20132

Analysis setup Event sample: – SiW ECAL physics prototype – 2008 FNAL testbeam of π - at 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 GeV – Matching Monte Carlo (physics lists: FTFP_BERT, QGSP_BERT, LHEP, CHIPS, FTF_BIC, QGSP_BIC, QGS_BIC) Event cuts: – correct trigger, minimum number of hits (25), hits in correct region of Ecal (centre), minimum hit energy (0.6 mip), no noisy layers, muon rejection, multiple particle event rejection, electron rejection Sample size: – 500 k MC events (accepted 25 k – 300 k) – 150 k – 700 k data events (accepted 20 k – 450 k) 03/06/20133

Event Classification Classify events as interacting or non-interacting – The absolute and relative energy increase in subsequent layers defines the interaction point In the note each category was again subdivided, but these criteria depended strongly on event cuts and will not be applied for the paper We will refine the event classification with machine learning techniques (more independent criteria) in future 03/06/20134

Interaction Layer Incorrect interaction (interaction found but not present in MC) Missed interaction (interaction present in MC but not found) Monte Carlo π - events (QGSP_BERT) Other physics lists have a very similar distribution Add ECAL picture 03/06/20135

Interaction finding Efficiency Efficiency = fraction of all true interacting events that is classified as interacting Contamination = fraction of all events classified as interacting that is non-interacting Between 0.03 at 2 GeV and 0.05 at 10 GeV 03/06/20136 Energy (GeV) QGSP_BERTFTFP_BERTFTF_BICQGSP_BICQGS_BICLHEPCHIPS Depends on MC physics list, especially at low energy, Bertini/Fritiof based models have the lowest efficiency

Interaction Fraction 03/06/20137 The interaction fraction is rather constant with beam energy The error on the data is based on the spread in MC interaction finding efficiency

High energy fraction in single layers 03/06/20138 At 2 GeV for 21% of events more than 60% of the energy is deposited in a single layer! At 10 GeV this is only 3% Similar observation reported by Tohru Takeshita at the last CALICE collaboration week at Desy. 2 GeV

Longitudinal Energy Profile for events classified as interacting 03/06/ GeV4 GeV6 GeV 8 GeV10 GeV The data is not well described by the MC. Fritiof based models fit best. For non-interacting events the profile is approximately flat.

Mean Shower Radius for events classified as interacting 03/06/ Clear difference between data and MC especially at low energy. Fritiof/Bertini models have a similar peak position, others models have on average a smaller shower radius. 2 GeV4 GeV6 GeV 8 GeV10 GeV

Summary Interacting events can be identified with an efficiency above 65%. These are compared to MC physics lists. Fritiof and Bertini based models seem to describe the data best. Next: – Finalize the paper by evaluating the error contributions Since October collaboration between LAL and LLR ILC groups and LAL AppStat group to better characterise and understand hadronic showers using machine learning techniques. First step: finding the most discriminating features (characteristics) of the shower and testing different machine learning techniques. – B. Kegl, F.Dubard, V. Boudry, M. Ruan, T.H. Tran, R. Poeschl, N. van der Kolk Special thanks to T. Frisson and D. Benbouzid 03/06/201311

[Backup]

Selection criteria for event types Interacting – FireBall (inelastic hadronic interaction) Absolute energy increase E i > E cut && E i+1 >E cut && E i+2 >E cut Relative energy increase F=(E i +E i+1 )/(E i-1 +E i-2 )>F cut && F’ = (E i+1 +E i+2 )/(E i-1 +E i-2 )> F cut && E aroundi >0.5E i – Peaked Local relative energy increase F>F cut && F’ > F cut not valid anymore at layer i+3 Non-interacting – Scattered (elastic scattering) Lateral distance of two pixels or more between the incoming and outgoing track – Mip All events which do not fit the other criteria 03/06/201313

Rejection efficiency for events with multiple incoming particles A muon may coincide with a pion Reject such events from the analysis by rejecting events with two large clusters of hits in the first 8 layers that have a small slope. Simulate “double events” -> Overlay pion events with muon events (add the hit collections together) Eff = #rejected/#total Energy (GeV)Eff for double events (pion + muon) Eff for single events (pion) MC physics list FTFP_BERT 03/06/201314

Estimate the contamination of “double events” in the accepted event sample in data Upper limit: Assume all rejected events were real double events contamination = (1-eff d )/eff d *rejected Estimate: rejected events are the sum of double and single events contamination = (1-eff d )*(rejected – eff s *total)/(eff d - eff s ) Energy (GeV)Upper limitContaminationOriginal fraction /06/201315

Step 1: SelectAndConvert hitType == Sim “ProtoSD03Collection” Set triggers true Calculate the energy weighted average hit position (c.o.g) C.o.g. in the correct region? Number of hits > 25 ? hitType == Digi “EmcCalorimeter_Hits” hitType == Reco “EmcCalorimeter_Hits” Set triggers trueCheck the triggers bits from the event header. Does the event pass the energy dependent trigger condition? Calculate the energy weighted average hit position (c.o.g), exluding isolated hits Check for noisy hits, pads and layers. Accept events without noisy layers. Reject events with two MC particles where only one reaches the ECAL. Add hits to the output collection which are not isolated and deposit a minimum amount of energy Check for the number of hits in HCAL and TCMC to reject muons Add the output collection “ECALConvCalorimeter Hits” to the event 03/06/201316

Step 2: MipFinder2 Input collection “ConvCalorimeterHits” Assign each hit to its layer object Find the first layer with a hit Start clustering in the first layer up to the 8th layer. If hits are closer than a minimum distance they are added to that cluster. Else they seed a new cluster Merge clusters if they are close enough together Select the most likely candidate cluster (with more that 3 hits) based on the slope of a fit to the cluster hits Reject the event if there are two large clusters with a slope less than 0.7 Add the cluster with the smallest slope to the output cluster collection “EcalClusters” 03/06/201317

Step 3: InteractionFinder Input hit collection “ConvCalorimeterHits” Input cluster “EcalIncomingClusters” Calculate the mean position and stdev Calculate the deposited energy per layer, excluding hits that are more than 3.5 stdev from the mean position Find the interaction layer based on increasing absolute energy The last 3 layers are excluded Find the interaction layer based on relative increasing energy The first 2 and last 3 layers are excluded Find scattered events Save event type in the hit collection Make a fit to the cluster hits and calculate the extrapolated track position for all layers Calculate the energy deposited around the extrapolated track 03/06/201318

Step 4: CaliceEcalHitInfo Input hit collection “ECALConvCalorimeterHits” Input cluster “EcalIncomingClusters” Fill histograms and a TTree of event and hit properties For MC calculate efficiency and contamination 03/06/201319