Progress report of the GLAST ACD Beam Test at CERN (Backsplash study) simulation and analysis Tsunefumi Mizuno, Hirofumi Mizushima (Hiroshima Univ.) and.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

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

Advertisements

Stefan Roesler SC-RP/CERN on behalf of the CERN-SLAC RP Collaboration

Jin Huang Los Alamos National Lab.  Cited from March collaboration Meeting EC group Internal Communication Jin Huang 2 Preshower ID power drop significantly.

2 Introduction   MiniCal test-beam studies started at the beginning of March (till March 6 we only had 17 APD’s, then 33 APD’s)   A few days were.

R&D of Strip/Block Scintillators E.P.Jacosalem, S.Iba, N.Nakajima, H.Ono, A.L.Sanchez, A.M.Bacala & H.Miyata GLD Calorimeter Group 8 th ACFA Workshop on.

W. Clarida, HCAL Meeting, Fermilab Oct. 06 Quartz Plate Calorimeter Prototype Geant4 Simulation Progress W. Clarida The University of Iowa.

Measurement of charmonia at mid-rapidity at RHIC-PHENIX  c  J/   e + e -  in p+p collisions at √s=200GeV Susumu Oda CNS, University of Tokyo For.

1 Study of the Tail Catcher Muon Tracker (TCMT) Scintillator Strips and Leakage with Simulated Coil Rick Salcido Northern Illinois University For CALICE.

July 2001 Snowmass A New Measurement of  from KTeV Introduction The KTeV Detector  Analysis of 1997 Data Update of Previous Result Conclusions.

Status of  b Scan Jianchun Wang Syracuse University Representing L b scanners CLEO Meeting 05/11/02.

TriggerLatchingEffLAT_ ppt1 Status report of overall Trigger and Latching Efficiencies study Instrument Analysis meeting, May 13, 2005 Tsunefumi.

GLAST LAT Project Test Beam Meeting, June 6, 2006 S. Funk 1/6 PS Positron Simulations Stefan Funk June 6, 2006.

New Small Wheel Background Charles Young (SLAC). NEW JD GEOMETRY New Small Wheel Background 2.

LCG Meeting, May 14th 2003 V. Daniel Elvira1 G4 (OSCAR_1_4_0) Validation of CMS HCal V. Daniel Elvira Fermilab.

1 Report on analysis of PoGO Beam Test at Spring-8 Tsunefumi Mizuno July 15, 2003.

Jan MDI WS SLAC Electron Detection in the Very Forward Region V. Drugakov, W. Lohmann Motivation Talk given by Philip Detection of Electrons and.

THE FORWARD PROTON DETECTOR AT DZERO Gilvan Alves Lafex/CBPF 1) MOTIVATION 2) DETECTOR OPTIONS 3) FPD R&D 4) OUTLOOK Lishep 98 Lafex/CBPF Feb 17, 1998.

Calibration of the new Particle Identification Detector (PID) Tom Jude, Derek Glazier, Dan Watts.

1 PoGO spring-8 BeamTest preparation Tsunefumi Mizuno and others June 2, 2003 at teleconference.

PoGO_G4_ ppt1 Study on Key Properties of PoGO by Geant4 Simulator January 28, 2004 Tsunefumi Mizuno History of changes:

O After integration and test at SLAC and GSFC, BFEM was shipped to the National Scientific Balloon Facility (NSBF) at Palestine, Texas. The experiment.

1 Report on analysis of PoGO Beam Test at Spring-8 Tsunefumi Mizuno July 15, 2003 July 21, 2003 revised August 1, 2003 updated.

Geant4 simulation for Balloon Flight Jan. 16, 2001 Software Workshop at SLAC Tsunefumi Mizuno.

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.

Nov Beam Catcher in KOPIO (H. Mikata Kaon mini worksyop1 Beam Catcher in the KOPIO experiment Hideki Morii (Kyoto Univ.) for the KOPIO.

G4 Validation meeting (5/11/2003) S.VIRET LPSC Grenoble Photon testbeam Data/G4 comparison  Motivation  Testbeam setup & simulation  Analysis & results.

1 BFEM Trigger Diagnostics Mar 12, 2002 Tsunefumi Mizuno Note: For reference, this document includes some works already reported (pages 2-5 and 7). The.

Validation of EM Part of Geant4

Luminosity Monitoring Issues  ZDC  what’s the advantage?  problems  BBC  can they do it? A. Drees QCD critical point workshop, Mar

10/10/2005 Alex Moiseev 2006 LAT Beam test 1 Suggestions to 2006 LAT prototype beam test plan Alex Moiseev, NASA/GSFC.

Search for the  + in photoproduction experiments at CLAS APS spring meeting (Dallas) April 22, 2006 Ken Hicks (Ohio University) for the CLAS Collaboration.

STAR Analysis Meeting, BNL – oct 2002 Alexandre A. P. Suaide Wayne State University Slide 1 EMC update Status of EMC analysis –Calibration –Transverse.

Nantes — 2008, July Analysis of results from EmCal beam test at CERN PS (and SPS) energies P. La Rocca & F. Riggi University & INFN Catania University.

PoGO_collimator_ ppt1 Study of PoGO background dependence on the collimator material/slow scintillator threshold April 21, 2004 Tsunefumi Mizuno.

SPHENIX EMCAL R&D Craig Woody BNL sPHENIX Design Study Meeting September 7, 2011.

 0 life time analysis updates, preliminary results from Primex experiment 08/13/2007 I.Larin, Hall-B meeting.

PoGO_G4_ ppt1 Study of optimized fast scintillator length for the astronomical hard X- ray/soft gamma-ray polarimeter PoGO November 1, 2004 Tsunefumi.

Test Beam Results on the ATLAS Electromagnetic Calorimeters Lucia Di Ciaccio – LAPP Annecy (on behalf of the ATLAS LAr Group) OUTLINE Description of the.

1 Suggestions to 2006 LAT prototype beam test plan Alex Moiseev, NASA/GSFC.

CALICE, CERN June 29, 2004J. Zálešák, APDs for tileHCAL1 APDs for tileHCAL MiniCal studies with APDs in e-test beam J. Zálešák, Prague with different preamplifiers.

PoGO_G4_ ppt1 Study of BGO/Collimator Optimization for PoGO August 8th, 2005 Tsunefumi Mizuno, Hiroshima University/SLAC

1 Study of Data from the GLAST Balloon Prototype Based on a Geant4 Simulator Tsunefumi Mizuno February 22, Geant4 Work Shop The GLAST Satellite.

2005/07/12 (Tue)8th ACFA Full simulator study of muon detector and calorimeter 8th ACFA Workshop at Daegu, Korea 2005/07/12 (Tue) Hiroaki.

PoGOLiteMC_ ppt 1 Updated MC Study of PoGOLite Trigger Rate/BG January 30, 2007 Tsunefumi Mizuno (Hiroshima Univ.)

ArgonneResult_ ppt1 Comparison of data and simulation of Argonne Beam Test July 10, 2004 Tsunefumi Mizuno

After integration and test at SLAC and GSFC, BFEM was shipped to the National Scientific Balloon Facility (NSBF) at Palestine, Texas. The experiment was.

ArgonneResult_ ppt1 Results of PoGO Argonne Beam Test PoGO Collaboration meeting at SLAC, February 7, 2004 Tsunefumi Mizuno

1 Report on analysis of PoGO Beam Test at Spring-8 Tsunefumi Mizuno July 15, 2003 July 21, 2003 revised.

O Tsunefumi Mizuno, Tuneyoshi Kamae, Jonny Ng, Hiroyasu Tajima (SLAC), John W. Mitchell, Robert Streitmatter (NASA GSFC), Richard C. Fernholz, Edward Groth.

O After the integration and test at SLAC/GSFC, BFEM was shipped to National Scientific Balloon Facility (NSBF) at Palestine, Texas. The experiments was.

Report of GLAST Balloon Flight October Annual meeting of Astronomical Society of Japan T. Mizuno and other GLAST Balloon Team

Geometry of the ACD Beam Test at CERN (2002) Tsunefumi Mizuno Overview of the Setup: p.2 ACD tile configuration: pp.3-4 Sn Calorimeter:

Straw prototype test beam 2017: first glance at the data

Update on Trigger simulation

Toward understanding of the MIPP data

LKr inefficiency measurement

June 1, 2004 Tsunefumi Mizuno Expected Modulation Factor of PoGO calculated with Geant4 Simulator with PoGO-fix June 1, 2004 Tsunefumi.

Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope ACD Final Performance

Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope

LSO Cal Geant4 Simulation

ILC Detector Activities in Korea

Jin Huang Los Alamos National Lab

Radiation Backgrounds in the ATLAS New Small Wheel

FFT analysis Goal : Energy calibration ( systematic error estimation)

Kazuya Aoki For the PHENIX Collaborations. Kyoto Univ. / RIKEN

Rick Salcido Northern Illinois University For CALICE Collaboration

NKS2 Meeting with Bydzovsky NKS2 Experiment / Analysis Status

ACD Backsplash test at CERN in 2002

COMPTON SCATTERING IN FORWARD DIRECTION

Analysis of GLAST Balloon Experiment Data

Presentation transcript:

Progress report of the GLAST ACD Beam Test at CERN (Backsplash study) simulation and analysis Tsunefumi Mizuno, Hirofumi Mizushima (Hiroshima Univ.) and Tuneyoshi Kamae (SLAC) October 1 st, 2002 Detector Geometry/ACD tile numbering: pp GeVProton Calibration and simulation: pp.4-6 Real Data for 200GeV/50GeV e-:pp.7-11 Comparison between data and simulation: pp Effect of the gap: pp Summary: p.19

Detector Geometry Veto Scint 20cm x 20cm x 1 cm with a hole (1cm diameter) Trigger Scint 1cm x 1cm x 1cm Absorber (Pb) 20cm x 20cm x 1 cm with a hole (1cm diameter) ACD 54cm x 24cm x 1cm Calorimeter Absorber 20cm x 20cm thickness and material is adjustable Calorimeter Gap 20cm x 20cm thickness and material is adjustable 45cm Note: So far, we have been using G4 simulation program developed before the Beam Test. Detector Geometry (shown above) is not the same as, but similar to, that of experiment. 47cm 1cm 53cm Beam

Nomenclature of ACD tile numbering There were 8 ACD tiles in the Beam Test. Here, the leftmost tile seen from Calorimeter is called “1 st ” and the rightmost one is called “8th”. Calorimeter ACD tiles Beam “1 st ” tile “8 th ” tile

Proton (350GeV) Calibration (1) “1 st” tile (run09) Peak~1220 Pedestal~149 “2 nd ” tile (run07) Peak~690 Pedestal~147 “3 rd ” tile (run06) Peak~1180 Pedestal~146 “4 th ” tile (run05) Peak~1150 Pedestal~144

Proton (350GeV) Calibration (2) “5 th ” tile (run04) Peak~1090 Pedestal~164 “6 th ” tile (run03) Peak~1630 Pedestal~153 “7 th ” tile (run02) Peak~730 Pedestal~158 “8 th ” tile (run01) Peak~1250 Pedestal~141

Energy deposition of 350 GeV Proton We assume that the peak position for 350 GeV proton corresponds to 1.7 MeV. G4 Simulation with 350 GeV Proton

Real data for 200 GeV e- (1) data: run45 (2inch Pb without gap) background: run11 “1 st” tile “2 nd ” tile “3 rd ” tile “4 th ” tile data background

Real data for 200 GeV e- (2) “5 th” tile “6 th ” tile “7 th ” tile data background data: run45 (2inch Pb without gap) background: run11 Note: In this report, we just subtract background run histogram (blue) from backsplash run one (black).

Real data for 200 GeV e- (3) Calorimeter ACD tiles Beam “1 st ” tile “8 th ” tile backsplash level differs by a factor of ~2 between tiles data: run45 (2inch Pb without gap) background: run11

Real data for 50 GeV e- (1) data: run47 (2inch Pb without gap) background: run11 “1 st” tile “2 nd ” tile “3 rd ” tile “4 th ” tile data background

Real data for 50 GeV e- (2) “5 th” tile “6 th ” tile “7 th ” tile data background data: run47 (2inch Pb without gap) background: run11 Note: In this report, we just subtract background run (blue histogram) from backsplash run (black histogram).

Comparison between data and simulation: 200 GeV e- (1) “1 st ” tile simulation data “2 nd ” tile “3 rd ” tile “4 th ” tile Note1: Statistical errors for simulation are similar to those of real data, but we do not show them for clarity. Note2: In blue histograms (simulation), we do not take scintillator response into account.

Comparison between data and simulaiton: 200 GeV e- (2) “5 th ” tile simulation data “6 th ” tile “7 th ” tile Simulation well predicts backsplash data for 200 GeV e-.

Comparison between data and simulation: 50 GeV e- (1) “1 st ” tile simulation data “2 nd ” tile “3 rd ” tile “4 th ” tile Note1: Statistical errors for simulation are similar to those of real data, but we do not show them for clarity. Note2: In blue histograms (simulation), we do not take scintillator response into account.

Comparison between data and simulaiton: 200 GeV e- (2) “5 th ” tile simulation data “6 th ” tile “7 th ” tile Simulation well predicts backsplash data for 50 GeV e-. To solve remaining difference, we may need to improve background subtraction and take response of scintillators into account.

Effect of the gap (1) Calorimeter without gap (1inch Pb)x4 ACD tiles Beam(50GeV/200GeV e-) Calorimeter with gap (1inch Pb and air gap)x4 ACD tiles Beam (50GeV/200GeV e-) Calorimeter with gap was used for some data and this might affect the backsplash as illustrated below. To estimate this effect, we run simulation. Excess in backsplash

Effect of the gap (2): 200GeV e- “1 st ” tile “4 th ” tile “7 th ” tile with gap without gap Gap might affect the backsplash of the “1 st ” (outermost) tile by a factor of 2 for 200GeV e-. The effect could be negligible for the inner tiles.

Effect of the gap (3): 50GeV e- “1 st ” tile “4 th ” tile “7 th ” tile with gap without gap Gap might affect the backsplash of the “1 st ” (outermost) tile by a factor of 1-2 for 50GeV e-. The effect could be negligible for the inner tiles.

Summary We analyzed 50GeV and 200GeV e- data (2inch Pb without gap) and compared them with simulation predictions. The simulation reproduces the data well. The effect of the gap of calorimeter might be up to by a factor of 2 for the outermost tile, but could be negligible for inner ones. We will update simulator geometry. We may need to improve background subtraction and take scintillator response into account. We will analyze/simulate data with calorimeter gap.