Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 Pass 6: GR V13R9 Muons, All Gammas, & Backgrounds Muons, All Gammas, & Backgrounds Overview Overview Data Sets: Muons: allMuon-GR-v13r9.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
CBM Calorimeter System CBM collaboration meeting, October 2008 I.Korolko(ITEP, Moscow)
Advertisements

Observations of the isotropic diffuse gamma-ray emission with the Fermi Large Area Telescope Markus Ackermann SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory on behalf.
Back Entering e+ - soft shower into Tracker from below Albedo Gamma (rocking)?
Bill Atwood, SCIPP/UCSC, May 8, 2006 GLAST 1 Partial validation of v9r3 - Bkg. Rej. Comparison 2000 sec. of backgrounds were run using v9r3 (heros: Tom.
GLAST LAT ProjectIA Workshop 6 – Feb28,2006 Preliminary Studies on the dependence of Arrival Time distributions in the LAT using CAL Low Energy Trigger.
Bill Atwood, SCIPP/UCSC, Apr. 3, 2006 GLAST 1 Pass 4 and Preparing for the LAT Handoff to NASA Why we can't go with the DC2 Analysis (Pass 3) 1) Background.
S. Ritz1 Checking Out What is Checked In  Need to optimize balance of checking between users and developers. –infuse more of a culture of detailed checking.
Bill Atwood, SCIPP/UCSC, Jan. 30, 2006 GLAST 1 Closer to Reality From Last Talk ( 7-Jan-06) – things seemed Great! However... 1) In estimating the SRD.
Bill Atwood, SCIPP/UCSC, Oct, 2005 GLAST 1 DC2 Discussion – What Next? 1)Alternatives - Bill's IM analysis - ???? 2)Backing the IM Analysis into Gleam.
M. Kowalski Search for Neutrino-Induced Cascades in AMANDA II Marek Kowalski DESY-Zeuthen Workshop on Ultra High Energy Neutrino Telescopes Chiba,
David WrenDC1 Closeout, 13 February OnboardFilter Update Work done by: Navid Golpayegani J.J. Russell David Wren Data Challenge I Closeout Meeting,
GLAST LAT ProjectTrigger Scheduler, Engines, and Rates 6 Feb 2006 J. Eric Grove Naval Research Lab Washington DC Trigger Scheduler, Engines, and Rates.
A.Chekhtman1 GLAST LAT ProjectCalibration and Analysis group meeting, April, 3, 2006 CAL on-orbit calibration with protons. Alexandre Chekhtman NRL/GMU.
Bill Atwood, Core Meeting, 9-Oct GLAS T 1 Finding and Fitting A Recast of Traditional GLAST Finding: Combo A Recast of the Kalman Filter Setting.
Bill Atwood, SCIPP/UCSC, Dec., 2003 GLAST 1 DC1 Instrument Response Agenda Where are we? V3R3P7 Classification Trees Covariance Scaled PSF Pair Energies.
Bill Atwood, SCIPP/UCSC, Nov, 2003 GLAST 1 Update on Rome Results Agenda A eff Fall-off past 10 GeV V3R3P7 Classification Trees Covariance Scaled PSFs.
Bill Atwood, SCIPP/UCSC, Dec., 2003 GLAST ALL GAMMAs using the New Recons First runs of ALL GAMMA – from glast-ts and SLAC Unix farm glast-ts sample: no.
Onboard Filter Update Performance after updated cuts David Wren 26 January 2004.
Bill Atwood, Rome, Sept, 2003 GLAST 1 Instrument Response Studies Agenda Overarching Approach & Strategy Classification Trees Sorting out Energies PSF.
Residual Background events after Rejection Cuts M total background events (GlastReleasev3r3p7) 344 residual events after Bill's rejection cuts. 342.
Bill Atwood, SCIPP/UCSC, Jan. 30, 2006 GLAST 1 Post Processing & Pass4 The time for DC2 is drawing to a close. However we're still only part ways up the.
Bill Atwood, SCIPP/UCSC, DC2 Closeout, May 31, 2006 GLAST 1 Bill Atwood & Friends.
Alex Moiseev NASA/GSFC 12/16/2005 Some ACD Calibration issues I.ACD mip peak monitoring 1. ACD mip peak monitoring requires the measurements to be done.
Science Requirements Verification GLAST LAT Project September 15, 2006: Pre-Shipment Review Presentation 2 of 12 GLAST Large Area Telescope Gamma-ray Large.
1 ACD studies: 1. Light Yield Determination for top ACD Tiles 2. Looking for holes (screws) in the ACD data Instrument Analysis Workshop VI Luis C. Reyes.
GLAST LAT Project Test Beam Meeting, June 6, 2006 S. Funk 1/6 PS Positron Simulations Stefan Funk June 6, 2006.
1 EMCal design MICE collaboration meeting Fermilab Rikard Sandström.
Bill Atwood, SCIPP/UCSC, Oct, 2005 GLAST 1 Back Ground Rejection Status for DC2 a la Ins. Miner Analysis.
Bill Atwood, SCIPP/UCSC, Jan., 2006 GLAST 1 The 3 rd Pass Back Rejection Analysis using V7R3P4 (repo) 1)Training sample: Bkg: Runs (SLAC) v7r3p4.
Stopping Power The linear stopping power S for charged particles in a given absorber is simply defined as the differential energy loss for that particle.
I have made the second half of the poster, first half which is made by tarak will have neutrino information. A patch between the two, telling why we do.
Pass 6: GR V13R9 Muons, All Gammas, & Backgrounds Muons, All Gammas, & Backgrounds Data Sets: Muons: allMuon-GR-v13r9 (14- Jan-2008) AG: allGamma-GR-v13r9.
W+jets and Z+jets studies at CMS Christopher S. Rogan, California Institute of Technology - HCP Evian-les-Bains Analysis Strategy Analysis Overview:
T. Burnett1 GLAST LAT ProjectDOE/NASA Baseline-Preliminary Design Review, January 9, 2002 SAS Software: Sources Detector geometry model Simulation Event.
Ivan Smiljanić Vinča Institute of Nuclear Sciences, Belgrade, Serbia Energy resolution and scale requirements for luminosity measurement.
1 Calorimeter in G4MICE Berkeley 10 Feb 2005 Rikard Sandström Geneva University.
Bill Atwood, SCIPP/UCSC, May, 2005 GLAST 1 A Parametric Energy Recon for GLAST A 3 rd attempt at Energy Reconstruction Keep in mind: 1)The large phase-space.
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.
Medium baseline neutrino oscillation searches Andrew Bazarko, Princeton University Les Houches, 20 June 2001 LSND: MeVdecay at rest MeVdecay in flight.
Heavy stable-particle production in NC DIS with the ZEUS detector Takahiro Matsumoto, KEK For the ZEUS collaboration.
1 Study of Data from the GLAST Balloon Prototype Based on a Geant4 Simulator Tsunefumi Mizuno February 22, Geant4 Work Shop The GLAST Satellite.
Feb. 3, 2007IFC meeting1 Beam test report Ph. Bruel on behalf of the beam test working group Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope.
Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope -France -Germany -Italy -Japan -Sweden -USA Energy Range 10 keV-300 GeV. GLAST : - An imaging gamma-ray telescope.
GLAST ACD Status. GLAST Overview McPositionHitCol AcdDigiCol AcdRecon AcdDigiAlg AcdReconAlg TkrFitTrackCol TDS Gaudi Algorithms.
View of TPC Optimization from Reconstruction Working Group Xin Qian and Tingjun Yang 1.
FP-CCD GLD VERTEX GROUP Presenting by Tadashi Nagamine Tohoku University ILC VTX Ringberg Castle, May 2006.
Report of GLAST Balloon Flight October Annual meeting of Astronomical Society of Japan T. Mizuno and other GLAST Balloon Team
By: Daniel Coelho Matthew Szydagis Robert Svoboda Improving Electron / Gamma Separation LBNE Software Fermilab, ILFebruary 1, 2013.
Background Rejection Prep Work
Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope ACD Final Performance
Comparison of GAMMA-400 and Fermi-LAT telescopes
GLAST LAT tracker signal simulation and trigger timing study
Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope
CALET-CALによる ガンマ線観測初期解析
GLAST Large Area Telescope:
Monte Carlo studies of the configuration of the charge identifier
Why do we want a TPC? P. Colas, CEA Saclay
Charged PID in Arbor 23/02/2016 Dan YU.
Event Classification & Background Rejection
Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope
Imaging crystals with TKR
Tower A: A First Look Finding the Data: Login: THIS ONE! user: glast
Searching for photons in the LAT
CR Photon Working Group
Why do we want a TPC? P. Colas, CEA Saclay
Eduardo do Couto e Silva Feb 28, 2006
Steve Magill Steve Kuhlmann ANL/SLAC Motivation
Studies of the Time over Threshold
Rick Salcido Northern Illinois University For CALICE Collaboration
Overview of Beam Test Benoit, Ronaldo and Eduardo Nov 8 , 2005 thanks to Steve and Bill for helping to consolidate all the information.
Presentation transcript:

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 Pass 6: GR V13R9 Muons, All Gammas, & Backgrounds Muons, All Gammas, & Backgrounds Overview Overview Data Sets: Muons: allMuon-GR-v13r9 (14- Jan-2008) AG: allGamma-GR-v13r9 (14-Jan-2008) BKG: backgnd-GR-v13r9 (15-Jan-2008) Bill Atwood SCIPP/UCSC Initial Pruning Cuts: ObfGamStatus >= 0 Passed Onboard Filter TkrNumTracks > 0 At least 1 track CalCsIRLn > 4 Track intercepts CAL CTBCORE >.1 Not unreasonable recon Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 Perspective Perspective Why is Background Rejection So Difficult?  Many Different Background Sources  Protons - Primary, Re-entrant, Splash  Electrons - Primary, Re-entrant, Splash  Positrons - Primary, Re-entrant, Splash  Alphas, Heavy Ions, and Neutrons  Large Phase Space  Particles populate 4p str.  Energies range from MeVs - to - 100s of GeVs  Sensitivity to Simulation Details  Geometry  Detector Response  Particle Interaction Physics  Very Small Signal-to-Noise Ratio: ~ 1 :  No Silver Bullets Developing the background rejection is like being in the movie "Ground Hog Day" Background Rejection Scheme Scheme Charge Particles in FoV (ACD) Filter TKR (Topology) Filter CAL (Shower) Filter Event Class Definitions

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 Pass 6 CPF Analysis Use Ribbons to close gaps between ACD Tiles Kill Tracks pointed at the ACD Corner Gaps Veto Events with 1 st Track pointed at hit Tile Remove events with excess Total ACD Energy Cut to remove events with low pulse height near Tile edges Compute Energy compensated variables for CT usage Compute CPFGamProb using CT Ensemble and Clean-upSchematic What's new since Pass 5  Using Ribbons as intended  Usage of scaled ACD energies  Improved understanding of where self veto comes from

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 ACD Basic Tile Energy Cut Example 1 Cut: Tkr1SSDVeto == 0 & AcdTkr1ActiveDist > 0 & AcdTkr1ActDistTileEnergy > 1. Self Veto Study Plot the ratio of events in Low & High energy bands as a function of the Tile Energy Cut. Having jumped ahead to the end of the analysis, there is an appreciable leakage of high energy events that can be missed by this cut. This sets limits on how liberal one can be with the Active Distance and associated Tile Energy. The scaled ACD energies become less capable as the reconstructed event energy increase (ie. > 10 GeV). These suggest that the Active Dist. Min is -16mm and Tile energy is.4 MeV. Fortunately the SSD req. is == 0 Example 2 Cut: Tkr1SSDVeto < 5 & AcdTkr1ActiveDist > 0 & AcdTkr1ActDistTileEnergy >.2 Note: This portion of the CPF Analysis was done with v13r7 since my v13r9 datasets all had the min. basics Active Dist. - Tile Energy cut applied in the Skimmer. Example 1 Low & High Energy Bands Story Tkr1SSDVeto == 0 Tkr1SSDVeto <= 1 Tkr1SSDVeto <= 2 Tkr1SSDVeto <= 4

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 First Cut AcdTotalTileEventEnergyRatio >.8 ACD Total Tile Energy Cut Scaled ACD Tile Energies Scaling the ACD energies to the total reconstructed energy lessens the self veto effect dramatically. Two scale energy variables are considered: AcdTileEventEnergyRatio = AcdTkr1ActDistTileEnergy/CTBBestEnergy * 100 AcdTotalTileEventEnergyRatio = AcdTotalEnergy/CTBBestEnergy * 100 Advantages & Disadvantages  Scaled responses automatically increase amount in ACD require to Veto an event as E increases  The dependence on Tracking (along with its ~ 2% mis-tracking) is greatly reduced  However as CTBBestEnergy increase, eventually even a MIP is passed… Note: something akin to this could be done onboard the LAT!

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 CPFGamProb > 0 50 Events 2.8 x Events For McTkr1DirErr 0 (98.0 %) (0.6 x ) CPF PreFilter Test: Muon Hermiticity Test 50 Events 10 Events All Muons Cut Muons

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 Pass 6 - Pass5 CPF Performance Comparison Note: These plots use the v13r7 data - skimmed v13r9 data have Basic Cut applied Conclusion: Conclusion: Pass 6 is an order of magnitude better the Pass 5 while retaining the same Gamma efficiency!

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 Pass 6 Topology (TKR) Analysis Create variables for use in this analysis Veto the Interrupted Shower Topology Use ToT to kill Range-outs & Heavy Ions Divide up into 3 Topological groups and apply PreFilters and CTs TKR (Topology) Schematic What's new in Pass 6?  Global IST Veto  Global Heavies & Range-outs Veto

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 Incoming e+ and e- can interact in the first few layers going to an all-neutral state. The resulting gammas can then pair convert particularly in the thick layers. A New Background Class Identified (Robert Johnson) Interrupted Shower Cut AcdTileEventEnergyRatio > max(.003, (6 - TkrUpstreamHC)*.006) & AcdTileEventEnergyRatio > ( *AcdTkr1ActiveDistENorm) & TkrUpstreamHC > 0 Examples using incident e+ (from Robert)

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 Heavy Ions & Range outs from Below Tracker ToTs give a dE/dX meas. Plotting Tkr1ToTFirst vs CTBBestLogEnergy suggested that scaling the ToT to energy had merit: ScaledToT = Tkr1FirstTot * 2.5/CTBBestLogEnergy Decoding by Source Type Heavies & Range Out Cut Tkr1ToTFirst 6.5 MIP Range Outs

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 CAL - or - Shower Shape Analysis Kill Events coming in the backside Kill Events coming in the CAL Sides 3 PreFilters / CTs one each for VTX, 1Tkr, and nTkr topologies This is the 3 rd of the three pieces. The data use for this required the CPF PreFilters ( CPFGamProb > 0) What New in Pass 6?  Pass 5 PreFilters Recycled  Attempt to limit CAL Back & Side entering Events Shower (CAL) Schematic

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 Backside Entering Filter Pick up signal in last layers of CAL. Cross correlate Layers 6 & 7 Zoom-in Rotate: Take sum and difference Check for Clean Entry CUT THESE EVENTS

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 Pass 6: Event Classes Working Definitions  SOURCE: E> 100 MeV ~.4 Hz. Maximize Aeff 500 MeV - 10 GeV  TRANSIENT: E > 100 MeV ~ 2 Hz. Maximize Aeff at low energy  DIFFUSE: E> 100 MeV ~.1 Hz. Minimize High energy tail > 10 GeV Will try to achieve to have a greater differentiation between Classes then was the case in Pass 5 The final chapter

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 Results: Bkg. Left = or Hz Bkg. Above 100 MeV = or Hz Pass 6 Transient Class CPFGamProb >.2 & CALSeal > 0 & ((TKRGamProb.1) | (TKRGamProb >.1 & CALGamProb < 0) | (TKRGamProb+CALGamProb >.5))

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 Source Class Req. Transient Class + TKR-IS and TKR-HR Vetos (CTBTKRISVeto > 0 & CTBTKRHRVeto > 0) Use CT with CalTkrComboCut.4 Hz - AllProb >.10 (!) AllProb Knob

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 Diffuse Class AllProb >.4 Leaves: All = 1860 (.13 Hz) E > 100 MeV = 1627 (.11 Hz) (By far the hardest due to high energy residual backgrounds)

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 But…. E > 3000 MeV : 87 event (6.0 mHz) Raising AllProb cut to.55 yields 40 events 26 events have McTkr1DirErr > Fail CPFGamProb >.08*CTBBestLogEnergy 6 have (AcdActiveDist3D > 0 & AcdActDistTileEnergy > 1.7) 1 has (AcdActiveDist3D > 0 & AcdActDistTileEnergy >.2 & Tkr1SSDVeto == 0)

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 Leaves: All = 978 (.068 Hz) E > 100 MeV = 934 (.065 Hz) No. Events > 3 GeV: 29 Events (2.0 mHz) Applying these cuts results in For Pass 5 this was 3 mHz. This needs improvement! AllProb >.4 AllProb >.4 + Cuts High Energy Residual Backgrounds Event Class Comparison

Bill Atwood, 6-Feb-2008 Summary Summary  Pass 6 improves on Pass 5  The basics for optimize Event Class definitions are available  Improvements needed to compensate for mis-tracking at high energy  Pass 6 also includes the Neutral Energy Analysis presented at NRL last November