Issues with cluster calibration + selection cuts for TrigEgamma note Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham Birmingham ATLAS Weekly Meeting 12/08/2010.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
UK egamma meeting, Sept 22, 2005M. Wielers, RAL1 Status of Electron Triggers Rates/eff for different triggers Check on physics channels Crack region, comparison.
Advertisements

Tracey Berry1 Looking into e &  for high energy e/  Dr Tracey Berry Royal Holloway.
1 The ATLAS Missing E T trigger Pierre-Hugues Beauchemin University of Oxford On behalf of the ATLAS Collaboration Pierre-Hugues Beauchemin University.
INTRODUCTION TO e/ ɣ IN ATLAS In order to acquire the full physics potential of the LHC, the ATLAS electromagnetic calorimeter must be able to identify.
1 N. Davidson E/p single hadron energy scale check with minimum bias events Jet Note 8 Meeting 15 th May 2007.
Validation of DC3 fully simulated W→eν samples (NLO, reconstructed in ) Laura Gilbert 01/08/06.
CSC Note Jet 8 Meeting – April 11 '07 Status and plan for single hadron scale check with minimum bias events N. Davidson The University of Melbourne.
1 Hadronic In-Situ Calibration of the ATLAS Detector N. Davidson The University of Melbourne.
The ATLAS trigger Ricardo Gonçalo Royal Holloway University of London.
Real Time 2010Monika Wielers (RAL)1 ATLAS e/  /  /jet/E T miss High Level Trigger Algorithms Performance with first LHC collisions Monika Wielers (RAL)
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.
Analysis Meeting – April 17 '07 Status and plan update for single hadron scale check with minimum bias events N. Davidson.
In order to acquire the full physics potential of the LHC, the ATLAS electromagnetic calorimeter must be able to efficiently identify photons and electrons.
1 N. Davidson Calibration with low energy single pions Tau Working Group Meeting 23 rd July 2007.
General Trigger Philosophy The definition of ROI’s is what allows, by transferring a moderate amount of information, to concentrate on improvements in.
February 19th 2009AlbaNova Instrumentation Seminar1 Christian Bohm Instrumentation Physics, SU Upgrading the ATLAS detector Overview Motivation The current.
W  eν The W->eν analysis is a phi uniformity calibration, and only yields relative calibration constants. This means that all of the α’s in a given eta.
LHCC Review, CERN, 19/10/99Paul Bright-Thomas, for Alan Watson 1 LVL1 Calorimeter Algorithm Updates Changes since the TDR: Greater “integration” of e/
Optimising Cuts for HLT George Talbot Supervisor: Stewart Martin-Haugh.
Development of a Particle Flow Algorithms (PFA) at Argonne Presented by Lei Xia ANL - HEP.
CaloTopoCluster Based Energy Flow and the Local Hadron Calibration Mark Hodgkinson June 2009 Hadronic Calibration Workshop.
Update on Diffractive Dijet Production Search Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham Birmingham ATLAS Weekly Meeting 13/09/2012.
Diffractive Dijet Production Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham SM Soft QCD topical meeting: Diffraction and Forward Detectors 24/05/2011.
Update on Diffractive Dijet Production Search Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham Birmingham ATLAS Weekly Meeting 24/01/2013.
Update on Diffractive Dijets Analysis Hardeep Bansil Birmingham ATLAS Weekly Meeting 10/04/2014.
CALOR April Algorithms for the DØ Calorimeter Sophie Trincaz-Duvoid LPNHE – PARIS VI for the DØ collaboration  Calorimeter short description.
Software offline tutorial, CERN, Dec 7 th Electrons and photons in ATHENA Frédéric DERUE – LPNHE Paris ATLAS offline software tutorial Detectors.
Status of Reconstruction in sidloi3 Ron Cassell 5/20/10.
Diffractive Dijet Production Issues with Analysis Hardeep Bansil Birmingham Weekly ATLAS Meeting 15/09/2011.
Monitoring of L1Calo EM Trigger Items: Overview & Midterm Results Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham Birmingham ATLAS Weekly Meeting 11/11/2010.
STAR Analysis Meeting, BNL – oct 2002 Alexandre A. P. Suaide Wayne State University Slide 1 EMC update Status of EMC analysis –Calibration –Transverse.
Status update of L1 Plots for note Hardeep Bansil, Juraj Bracinik, Paul Newman University of Birmingham Trigger E/Gamma Signature Group Meeting 08/07/2010.
ATLAS and the Trigger System The ATLAS (A Toroidal LHC ApparatuS) Experiment is one of the four major experiments operating at the Large Hadron Collider.
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.
Update on Diffractive Dijet Production Search Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham Soft QCD WG Meeting 29/04/2013.
Measurement of inclusive jet and dijet production in pp collisions at √s = 7 TeV using the ATLAS detector Seminar talk by Eduardo Garcia-Valdecasas Tenreiro.
Hardeep Bansil (University of Birmingham) on behalf of L1Calo collaboration ATLAS UK Meeting, Royal Holloway January 2011 Argonne Birmingham Cambridge.
Update on Diffractive Dijets Analysis Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham Soft QCD / Diffraction WG Meeting 31/03/2014.
Update on Diffractive Dijets Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham 12/07/2013.
1 EMCAL Reconstruction in Pass pp 900 GeV 29/03/2010 Gustavo Conesa Balbastre.
L1Calo EM Efficiencies Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham L1Calo Joint Meeting, Stockholm 29/06/2011.
Trigger study on photon slice Yuan Li Feb 27 th, 2009 LPNHE ATLAS group meeting.
Régis Lefèvre (LPC Clermont-Ferrand - France)ATLAS Physics Workshop - Lund - September 2001 In situ jet energy calibration General considerations The different.
LHC Symposium 2003 Fermilab 01/05/2003 Ph. Schwemling, LPNHE-Paris for the ATLAS collaboration Electromagnetic Calorimetry and Electron/Photon performance.
10 January 2008Neil Collins - University of Birmingham 1 Tau Trigger Performance Neil Collins ATLAS UK Physics Meeting Thursday 10 th January 2008.
Update 2 on Noise Clusters Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham 23/04/2013.
ATLAS and the Trigger System The ATLAS (A Toroidal LHC ApparatuS) Experiment [1] is one of the four major experiments operating at the Large Hadron Collider.
Update on Diffractive Dijets Analysis Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham Soft QCD / Diffraction WG Meeting 28/10/2013.
Update on Diffractive Dijets Search Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham SM Soft QCD meeting 12/12/2011.
Update on Diffractive Dijet Production Search Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham Birmingham ATLAS Weekly Meeting 08/12/2011.
Fixing Tau HLT (Part 1.5/2) ‏ M.Bachtis. 2 L1 Seeding Fix L1: Seeding with High Et Jet paths to increase efficiency with High Et Still using corrected.
Using direct photons for L1Calo monitoring + looking at data09 Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham Birmingham ATLAS Weekly Meeting February 18, 2010.
L1Calo EM Efficiency Maps Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham L1Calo Weekly Meeting 07/03/2011.
BEACH 04J. Piedra1 SiSA Tracking Silicon stand alone (SiSA) tracking optimization SiSA validation Matthew Herndon University of Wisconsin Joint Physics.
Study of missing Level-1 triggers using data10 Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham Trigger E/Gamma Signature Group Meeting 20/05/2010.
Photon purity measurement on JF17 Di jet sample using Direct photon working Group ntuple Z.Liang (Academia Sinica,TaiWan) 6/24/20161.
Update on Diffractive Dijets Analysis Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham 06/11/2013.
4 Dec., 2001 Software Week Data flow in the LArG Reconstruction software chain Updated status for various reconstruction algorithm LAr Converters and miscellaneous.
H->WW->lνlν Analysis - Improvements and results - - Data and MC - Higgs Working group meeting, 6 January 2011 Magda Chełstowska & Rosemarie Aben.
Diffractive Dijet Production: Update on analysis issues Hardeep Bansil Birmingham Weekly ATLAS Meeting 22/09/2011.
Check of Calibration Hits in the Atlas simulation. Assignment of DM energy to CaloCluster. G.Pospelov Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics, Novosibirsk,
Zvi Citron Correlations Between Neutral Bosons and Jets in Pb+Pb Collisions at 2.76 TeV with the ATLAS Detector Zvi Citron for the ATLAS Collaboration.
TrigEgamma Note L1 Plots Status Update Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham Birmingham ATLAS Weekly Meeting 30/09/2010.
Monitoring of L1Calo EM Efficiencies
Emmanuel Monnier, Elodie Tiouchichine, Elisabeth Petit LAr Week
Some introduction Cosmics events can produce energetic jets and missing energy. They need to be discriminated from collision events with true MET and jets.
Effect of t42 algorithm on jets
SM Direct Photons meeting
Jin Huang Los Alamos National Lab
Presentation transcript:

Issues with cluster calibration + selection cuts for TrigEgamma note Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham Birmingham ATLAS Weekly Meeting 12/08/2010

Sliding Window Clustering 2 Cluster finding: Towers are created by summing the cells of the presampler and the 3 EM calorimeter layers in depth. A “sliding window algorithm”, using a 5x5 window (0.125x0.125), is used to find clusters. The window slides in the towers η-φ grid to find local energy peaks. Cluster definition: Once the local energy peak is found, the algorithm clusters the energy in a fixed window size around the found peak. The window size can be a 5x5, 3x5 or 3x7 window based on the cluster position and if it is electron or photon. Cluster corrections (to offline object): When the cluster is properly defined, many corrections are made at EF to correct various biases: η, φ position corrections η, φ energy modulation corrections Intercryostat gap (TR) correction EM Layer weights correction

data10 Analysis Athena Production Updated TrigT1CaloAnalysisExamples package Using MinBias stream DESDs (DESDM_EGAMMA) Using Good Runs Lists – find r and ready and dq atlgl g and dq cp_eg_electron_barrel y+ and dq cp_eg_electron_endcap y+ and dq trele y+ Check events pass L1_MBTS_1 trigger item Get electron and photon candidates and get calibrated clusters from them (egClusterCollection) Calculate Raw Cluster E T, η, φ using energy weighting of CaloCells that make up CaloCluster (cannot get raw variables directly for these clusters) Match to RoI using Δr = √(η e/γ CL -η RoI ) 2 +(φ e/γ CL -φ RoI ) 2 Did this for run (1194 μb -1 before GRL) 3

Raw Cluster φ 4 Comparison of raw cluster to calibrated cluster φ Distributions look similar until you get to ±π Energy weighting method treated ±π as discontinuous so φ shifted towards centre Fix by asking for biggest φ difference between CaloCells CALIBRATED RAW SHIFT CELLS TO BE CONTIN- UOUS

Raw Cluster φ 5 Quick check of Δφ shows a lot of improvement However still see that Δφ is not as sharp as Δη Possibly a better way of calculating both? BEFORE AFTER ΔφΔη

Calibrated/Raw E T 6 For a cluster, this ratio = 1 ideally if everything works properly, no energy is lost elsewhere in the detector and no corrections need to be made Asked to consider the effects of removing candidate electrons and photons where Calibrated E T /Raw E T > 2 for the cluster Told that it should not be an issue for photons but is Photons Electrons

Calibrated/Raw E T 7 Low statistics at the moment but backs previous results – not really a problem in central barrel but increases the further out in η you go Look at isEm level of object failing cut – most from jets NoneNone LooseLoose MediumMedium TightTight

Good news Other people have spotted this problem and are aware of it This should not be too much of a problem in the long run as the electron and photon selections are not that clean yet (dominated by fakes) Need lots more direct photons and J/Ψ particles to look at in order to improve selection 8

Effect on Bump? Not really (for this run at least) Majority of time: one cluster matched to one RoI – Calibrated cluster has less than 3 GeV (> 2.3, 2.4) raw cluster usually has slightly smaller energy than this but this is enough to make a 3 GeV RoI Other case: 2 or more clusters matched to one RoI – One cluster from an electron and one from a photon both with energy less than 3 GeV and positions are almost identical or at least very close (one cluster may fail isEm loose) Rare case: 2 or more clusters matched to one RoI – One cluster with low energy matches to another one nearby with a much higher energy 9

Vertex cut For TrigEgamma note, I have been asked to use a cut that requires at least 1 primary vertex in an event and that the primary vertex needs at least 3 tracks – Works majority of the time What are reasons why events do not pass this cut – Occasionally only 1 or 2 tracks associated to the primary vertex – Most of the time, no tracks associated to the primary vertex – Have not seen events where there is no primary vertex yet (reassuring) What’s going on here? 10

OTX map cut Another cut I have been asked to use requires that objects which fall into some dead OTX (Optical Transmitter) region are excluded Official egamma method for offline objects A cluster is rejected for any of the following regions: – Its core (3x3 in the Middle layer) contains an isolated BAD cell – It involves a dead FEB (Front End Board) in Strips and/or Middle layer – It involves a dead FEB in Presampler – It involves a bad HV region in Strips, Middle, Presampler – It has at least one dead cell among the 8 central cells in Strips (PHOTONS ONLY) Run dependent (OTX maps made for different run ranges) Slides Code and root files SlidesCode and root files 11

OTX map cut Effect on electrons and photons : absolute number of candidates failing cuts as a function of raw η and φ (using trigger tower binning) Cut covers a greater area for photons 12 PhotonsElectrons (One dead cell among the 8 central cells in Strips?)

OTX map cut What is causing problems? A cause for concern? Presampler FEB dead Strips FEB dead Middle layer FEB dead HV Problem Others are from bad cells 13 How big an area does an FEB cover?

OTX map cut Does it kill all candidates in a given area? Make binning finer so that it gets closer to cell level Calculate efficiency of cut being able to remove candidates A few odd bins where the efficiency of cut is less than 1 but for majority of cases it will remove all objects in a given area 14

Comparing all cuts Quick look at all of the cuts that an object can fail Still get a good number of candidates to study – Hope they trigger and create an RoI (or not)! 15