The “Comparator” Atlfast vs. Full Reco Automated Comparison Chris Collins-Tooth 19 th February 2006.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Fast b tagging at L2 B tagging meeting XX-XX-04 Sascha Caron (NIKHEF) … using the Silicon Track Trigger (STT) Methods to do a very fast b tagging Some.
Advertisements

UK egamma meeting, Sept 22, 2005M. Wielers, RAL1 Status of Electron Triggers Rates/eff for different triggers Check on physics channels Crack region, comparison.
SiD PFA Status and Calorimeter Performance Ron Cassell (SLAC) SiD Design Study Meeting 11/15/08.
QCD Background… and the Resolution Saminder Dhaliwal August 30 th 2005.
Top Physics Validation: Reconstruction, Simulation and Bytestream Paul S Miyagawa The University of Manchester.
Status Analysis pp -> D s D s0 (2317) Overview Reconstruction Some QA plots Figure of merit First approach/strategy.
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.
Validation of DC3 fully simulated W→eν samples (NLO, reconstructed in ) Laura Gilbert 01/08/06.
1 previously, when I calculated event selection efficiencies, I defined efficiencies as the following: efficiency in electron channel = (total number of.
September 27, 2005FAKT 2005, ViennaSlide 1 B-Tagging and ttH, H → bb Analysis on Fully Simulated Events in the ATLAS Experiment A.H. Wildauer Universität.
A simulation study of the rapidity distributions of leptons from W boson decays at ATLAS Laura Gilbert.
Analysis Meeting – April 17 '07 Status and plan update for single hadron scale check with minimum bias events N. Davidson.
My work PAST WORKS: 1) (Madrid) Data Analysis in L3, LEP: - Measurement of the Mass, Width and Cross Section of the W boson production at LEP, Study.
L3 Filtering: status and plans D  Computing Review Meeting: 9 th May 2002 Terry Wyatt, on behalf of the L3 Algorithms group. For more details of current.
VH (H->bb) Cut Flow Status. Introduction Hoping to start the mini-ntuple etc production now Some push over last few days but still not as much as would.
Energy Flow and Jet Calibration Mark Hodgkinson Artemis Meeting 27 September 2007 Contains work by R.Duxfield,P.Hodgson, M.Hodgkinson,D.Tovey.
LCWS 2004, ParisSonja Hillert, University of Oxfordp. 1 Flavour tagging performance analysis for vertex detectors LCWS 2004, Paris Sonja Hillert (Oxford)
Steps toward ttH (H->bb) in the Atlas ‘PhysicsAnalysis’ Environment. Chris Collins-Tooth Christian Shaw.
2004 Xmas MeetingSarah Allwood WW Scattering at ATLAS.
Progress on H/Abb -> 4b’s channel for the FTK physics case ~ 4jets Trigger w/ and w/o FTK ~ Kohei Yorita Young-Kee Kim University of the FTK.
Lepton efficiency & fake rate Yousuke Kataoka University of Tokyo Content definitions of leptons p2 efficiency and fake rate for SU3 ( ) p3, p4.
News from Atlantis Event Display Qiang Lu, Mark Stockton, Juergen Thomas, Peter Watkins (Birmingham) Hans Drevermann (CERN) Andrew Haas (Columbia) Eric.
A few slides to summarise what Alessandro and I were up to for March 24th video meeting Taking for granted that W+/- are good measurements to make- are.
Alexander Richards, UCL 1 Atlfast and RTT (plus DCube) Christmas Meeting 18/12/2007.
9-13/9/03 Atlas Overview WeekPeter Sherwood 1 Atlfast, Artemis and Atlantis What, Where and How.
Optimizing CMS Data Formats for Analysis Peerut Boonchokchuay August 11 th,
17 December 1998Silvia Resconi ATLFast++ into LHC++: a first exercise The aim of the exercise: from generation to analysis using ATLFast++ algorithms into.
CaloTopoCluster Based Energy Flow and the Local Hadron Calibration Mark Hodgkinson June 2009 Hadronic Calibration Workshop.
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.
1 Performance of a Magnetised Scintillating Detector for a Neutrino Factory Scoping Study Meeting Rutherford Appleton Lab Tuesday 25 th April 2006 M. Ellis.
A New Tool For Measuring Detector Performance in ATLAS ● Arno Straessner – TU Dresden Matthias Schott – CERN on behalf of the ATLAS Collaboration Computing.
Bangalore, India1 Performance of GLD Detector Bangalore March 9 th -13 th, 2006 T.Yoshioka (ICEPP) on behalf of the.
Integration of the ATLAS Tag Database with Data Management and Analysis Components Caitriana Nicholson University of Glasgow 3 rd September 2007 CHEP,
Jean-Roch Vlimant, CERN Physics Performance and Dataset Project Physics Data & MC Validation Group McM : The Evolution of PREP. The CMS tool for Monte-Carlo.
Current Analysis Activity/Results (Only brief overview) Sunil Bansal (Panjab University, Chandigarh) Approved results marked.
1 Update on tt-bar signal and background simulation Stan Bentvelsen.
T. Lari – INFN Milan Status of ATLAS Pixel Test beam simulation Status of the validation studies with test-beam data of the Geant4 simulation and Pixel.
Fast Simulation and the Higgs: Parameterisations of photon reconstruction efficiency in H  events Fast Simulation and the Higgs: Parameterisations of.
1 OO Muon Reconstruction in ATLAS Michela Biglietti Univ. of Naples INFN/Naples Atlas offline software MuonSpectrometer reconstruction (Moore) Atlas combined.
Fully Hadronic Top Anti-Top Decay (Using TopView) Fully Hadronic Top Anti-Top Decay (Using TopView) Ido Mussche NIPHAD meeting, Februari 9 th :
How to… (a.k.a. Photon PID and Pizero Analysis) G. David, April 20, 2000 A report on the status and advertisement of the tools
28/4/2006Chris Collins-Tooth tth, (h → bb) with EventViews Chris Collins-Tooth, Christian Shaw 03-May-2006.
VBF H- > ττ- > lept had Electron Channel Jaspreet Sidhu ATLAS Toronto meeting
A search for the ZZ signal in the 3 lepton channel Azeddine Kasmi Robert Kehoe Southern Methodist University Thanks to: H. Ma, M. Aharrouche.
Responsibles: Jon Butterworth (UCL), Claire Gwenlan (Oxford), Daniela Rebuzzi (Pavia, INFN) ATLAS MC Validation Meeting, 24 May 2011 HERWIG validation.
Introduction to FCC Software FCC Istanbul 11 March, 2016 Alice Robson (CERN/UNIGE) on behalf of / with thanks to the FCC software group.
Atautau  lh Carlos Solans TileCal Valencia meeting 20th September 2007.
BEACH 04J. Piedra1 SiSA Tracking Silicon stand alone (SiSA) tracking optimization SiSA validation Matthew Herndon University of Wisconsin Joint Physics.
VBF H- > ττ- > lept had Electron Channel Analysis Jaspreet Sidhu
Photon Reconstruction Efficiencies in Higgs → γγ Events Neil Cooper-Smith RHUL ATLAS UK Higgs Meeting - Durham 11/01/07.
Marcello Barisonzi First results of AOD analysis on t-channel Single Top DAD 30/05/2005 Page 1 AOD on Single Top Marcello Barisonzi.
E. Soldatov Tight photon efficiency study using FSR photons from Z  ll  decays E.Yu.Soldatov* *National Research Nuclear University “MEPhI”
Mark Dorman UCL/RAL MINOS WITW June 05 An Update on Using QE Events to Estimate the Neutrino Flux and Some Preliminary Data/MC Comparisons for a QE Enriched.
David Lange Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
ATLAS Distributed Computing Tutorial Tags: What, Why, When, Where and How? Mike Kenyon University of Glasgow.
RD. Schaffer, L. Iconomidou Fayard, D. Fournier
Concluding discussion on Commissioning, Etmiss and DPD
Tree based validation tool for track reconstruction
Efficiency of Muon Reconstruction
Global PID MICE CM43 29/10/15 Celeste Pidcott University of Warwick
OO Muon Reconstruction in ATLAS
Validation of valid3 samples Zee(106050) and Jpsiee(105751)
ILD Optimisation: towards 2012 University of Cambridge
Linear Collider Simulation Tools
Update on Data Analysis
Search for MSSM neutral Higgs bosons in the decay channel A/H→μ+μ- with the ATLAS detector Giorgos Dedes , Nectarios Benekos , Sandra Horvat , Sergey Kotov,
ZZ→llnn Analysis Thomas Barber University of Cambridge
tth, (h→bb) with EventViews
Linear Collider Simulation Tools
Feb. 25,2009 Jongseok Lee (Sungkyunkwan University)
Presentation transcript:

The “Comparator” Atlfast vs. Full Reco Automated Comparison Chris Collins-Tooth 19 th February 2006

Glasgow ATLASC. Collins-Tooth19-Feb-2006 Comparator “Flow” User sets up area for running a release as normal. User downloads, compiles Comparator. Comparator uses AOD as input. –Comparator makes “cleaning cuts” on full and fast collections. –Runs Atlfast many times with different smearing values. Atlfast needs TRUTH information as input. –Until , this was missing (SpclMC was not complete). –User had to make their own AOD from ESD with “TruthEvent”. Comparator performs Chi-squared test on full and fast smeared distributions. Uses MINUIT to find optimal tuned smearing parameters. The Comparator- A utility to allow ATLFAST to be compared and tuned to the full simulation using the same generated events.

Glasgow ATLASC. Collins-Tooth19-Feb-2006 Comparator Electron Cuts Before any tuning of Atlfast, we make simple comparisons. Some “cleaning cuts” needed to be applied to get Atlfast and Full Reconstruction to agree at all... These cuts are applied as standard, though they can be modified via jobOptions if needed. Pt>10 GeV,  <2.5, hasTrack(), isEM()%16 ==0, E/p in range (  <1.4) E/p in range (  >1.4) electron cleaning cuts

Glasgow ATLASC. Collins-Tooth19-Feb-2006 Comparator Muon Cuts Yellow plot shows Truth with no cuts. Hatched histogram shows Truth with Pt >10 GeV, |  | <2.5. These cuts are also applied to Atlfast (red) and MuID (black). Good agreement – now it makes more sense to tune these distributions. Once “cleaning cuts” applied, engage tuning of Atlfast to drive it towards Full Reco distribution.

Glasgow ATLASC. Collins-Tooth19-Feb-2006 Tuning Atlfast Atlfast parameterisations for smearing electrons, muons and photons are not fixed any more. ‘Standard’ parameters are held in Atlfast jobOptions. One can tune these parameters, or (advanced!) make up new smearing formulae.. Example tuning below shows muon energies for same events using untuned and tuned Atlfast parameters Tuning Atlfast

Glasgow ATLASC. Collins-Tooth19-Feb-2006 AMI database output The tuning results are stored in an AMI database. Users can retrieve results (i.e. tuned parameter sets), paste them into the Atlfast jobOptions, then run Athena/Atlfast as normal (i.e. no Comparator needed!). The smearing formula (schema) used The Atlfast module (e.g. ElectronMaker) being tuned The input AOD used in the tuning The full Athena jobOptions used as input for the run The contact details of the person performing the run The histogram names used for the full/fast comparison The optimised output values of the smearing parameters The name and location of the output root files

Glasgow ATLASC. Collins-Tooth19-Feb-2006 Where might this be useful... Consider the Comparator if you are in need of an extremely large sample of events (e.g a background). You could use the Comparator on a small sample of full/fast events to gain confidence in Atlfast. Atlfast can be tuned if results not satisfactory. Atlfast can then be run on Generator files (not AOD!). Very rapidly produce a large sample....

Glasgow ATLASC. Collins-Tooth19-Feb-2006 Intended comparator ‘core’ output Tracks –multiplicities, matching efficiency etc. Particle distributions (e,  etc.) –Pt, E, ,  Jet distributions –Pt, E, , flatness in  b-tagging quantities –impact parameter resolution –tagging efficiency/purity Allow more specialised parameterisations to be developed/used –e.g. parameterise electrons and track matching efficiency as a function of 

Glasgow ATLASC. Collins-Tooth19-Feb-2006 Finally.. All this and further information about the Comparator is available on the TWiki: Soon, AOD with TruthEvent should not be needed (v ). –I am performing tests on this to ensure it is useable Next to come will be jets, though this presents a challenge due to missing low energy particles in new ‘truth’ record.