1. Latifa Elouadrhiri Jefferson Lab
First Experiment Ready for Science Priorities and Path for CLAS12 Commissioning
Latifa Elouadrhiri
Jefferson Lab
CLAS12 First Experiment Workshop
CLAS Collaboration
October 3, 2017

2. CLAS12 Hall B Equipment MM CND FT RICH
Forward Detector (FD)
TORUS magnet
HT Cherenkov Counter
Drift chamber system
LT Cherenkov Counter
Forward ToF System
Pre-shower calorimeter
E.M. calorimeter
Forward Tagger
RICH detector
Central Detector (CD)
Solenoid magnet
Silicon Vertex Tracker
Central Time-of-Flight
Central Neutron Det.
- MicroMegas
Beamline
Photon Tagger
Shielding
Polarized Targets MM
CND FT
RICH
Number of readout channels : 111, 832

3. First Experiment- Run Group A
Proposal
Physics
Contact
Rating
Days
Group
New equipment
Energy
Run Group
Target E
Hard exclusive electro-production of π0, η
Stoler B 80
139
RICH (1 sector)
Forward tagger 11 A
F. Sabatié
liquid H2
E A
Exclusive N*->KY Studies with CLAS12
Carman
(60)
E B
Transition Form Factor of the η’ Meson with CLAS12
Kunkel
(80) E
Proton’s quark dynamics in SIDIS pion production
Avakian 60
E A
Semi-inclusive Λ productiuon in target fragmentation region
Mirazita
E B
Colinear nucleon structure at twist-3
Pisano
E (a)
Deeply Virtual Compton Scattering
Sabatie E
Excitation of nucleon resonances at high Q2
Gothe B+ 40 E
Hadron spectroscopy with forward tagger
Battaglieri A-
119
E A
Photoproduction of the very strangest baryon
Guo
(120) E
Timelike Compton Scatt. & J/ψ production in e+e-
Nadel-Turonski
120
E A
J/ψ Photoproduction & study of LHCb pentaquarks
Stepanyan E
Exclusive φ meson electroproduction with CLAS12
Stoler, Weiss
Beam time partial sum
559 (1,049)
Experiment ending with A or B are run group experiments approved by the CLAS collaboration. They are running parallel to the experiments with same experiment number. Experiments ending with (a) and (b) take data with both run groups.

4. CLAS12 First Experiment Configuration
Duration: 139 days
20 days commissioning
60 days high luminosity (1035cm-2s-1)
39 days low luminosity (5x1033cm-2s-1)
20 days torus polarity = negative
Energy: 11 GeV
Target: LH2
Experiment parameters
Beam energy
10.6 GeV, electrons polarized
Beam current
4nA (5x 1033) to 80 nA (1x1035)
Torus field and polarity
100% (negative particles in-bending)
Solenoid field and polarity
100% (nominal)
Trigger(s)
Electron trigger (HTCC/PCAL/EC)
Electron (1 - 5 GeV) in the FT and ≥ 2 (3) hadrons in CLAS12
Target
5cm LH2

5. CLAS12 Components for First Experiment
Torus magnet - to be operated up to ±100% of design current
Solenoid magnet – to be operated up to 100% of design current
Forward Detector (FD) – High Threshold Cherenkov Counter (HTCC), Forward Micromegas Tracker (FMT), Drift Chamber system (DC -R1, R2, R3), Low Threshold Cherenkov Counter (LTCC, 1 sector), RICH (1 sector), Forward Time-of-Flight (FTOF 1b/1a), Preshower Calorimeter (PCAL), Electromagnetic Calorimeter (EC)
Forward Tagger (FT) – FT-calorimeter, FT-Hodoscope, FT-Tracker
Central Detector (CD) – Silicon Vertex Tracker (SVT), Barrel MicroMegas Tracker (BMT), Central Time-of-Flight (CTOF) (being Installed), Central Neutron Detector (CND)
Slow Controls
DAQ/Online computing
Trigger
Beamline equipment
Offline Software

6. Beamline Configurations
“FT ON”
“FT OFF”

7. DC Region 1 occupancy versus solenoid field
FT: ON
FT: OFF

8. Beamline/detector configurations that are relevant
“FT ON”
“FT OFF”
CLAS12 configuration for spring 2017 Run

9. Schedule
Run Schedule: Hall B is scheduled for an Commissioning /Engineering Run for a total of 30 calendar days beginning December 4, 2017, and ending January 28, First Experiment is scheduled to begin February 5. There are 8 days of no-beam built into the schedule that can be used to implement changes to CLAS12 components if needed (for example as a result of findings during the engineering run).

10. Schedule
Run Schedule: Hall B is scheduled for an Engineering Run for a total of 30 calendar days beginning December 4, 2017, and ending January 28, First Experiment is scheduled to begin February 5. There are 8 days of no-beam built into the schedule that can be used to implement changes to CLAS12 components if needed (for example as a result of findings during the engineering run). CLAS12 Commissioning with Cosmics for 2 weeks stating November 17

11. CLAS12 – “Ready for Science” Review
Jefferson Lab, CEBAF Center 9/25-26, 2017 Room L102 (9/25) , F326/7 (9/26) Review Committee : E. Smith (co-chair), S. Stepanyan (co-chair), K. Griffioen, K. Joo, D. Lawrence, B. Hess, B. Zihlmann

12. CLAS12 “Ready for Science” Charge
The scope of the meeting is to:
(A) Review the readiness of the “CLAS12 First experiment” effort to coordinate the CLAS collaboration in the task of producing first rate science in course of and following the data taking period, and be ready for expedient analysis and result publications (this includes both understanding the detector and having the simulations and reconstruction software in place for physics.)
(B) Review the readiness of the effort to operate and commission all systems, providing the on-line monitoring and controls, trigger system, and the readout of all detector and ancillary systems.
(C) Review the readiness of the calibration effort to use the scheduled engineering run for optimizing the detector responses. This effort must be prioritized to support the CLAS12 First experiment effort in the physics run immediately following the engineering run.
Note: For the purpose of this review, the committee should assume:
Both magnets will perform at the level required for the completion of the
First Experiment plan, and beam time will be made available to carry out
the program as requested.

13. Specific Charge Items
Is the presented commissioning plan for CLAS12 comprehensive and developed in sufficient detail to ensure that upon completion the CLAS12 system will be ready for production data taking? Is the timeline reasonable and optimized, both in terms of duration of the study and the order of activities.
Have the necessary production triggers been developed that are needed for the physics run, and are plans in place to test their efficiency?
Are the presented monitoring and software tools adequate for the efficient commissioning of all CLAS12 systems?
Are the online and offline analysis shift staffing plans during the commissioning period appropriate and adequate?
Are the available resources (e.g. computing manpower) sufficient to enable the implementation of the commissioning results into the production data analysis on a reasonably short time scale (weeks)?
Is the documentation of all systems (detector hardware, online/offline software, operating procedures, etc.) sufficiently detailed and complete to provide the required support for the shift taker and experts?
Is the scope of simulation studies that have been performed or are planned before the run period adequate to understand the expected baseline performance of the CLAS12 system
Are there studies or tests missing that should be specifically included in the plan to ensure the readiness for production data taking and processing?

14. CLAS12 “Ready for Science” Report
Final report from the committee received October 2, 2017
Will be posted on the review web page
Significant holes in our Calibration and Commissioning plans/execution
The focus of the collaboration for the coming few weeks will be on the preparation and the execution of successful engineering run.
Tracking of all the recommendations
Document summarizing response to all the recommendations due November 10, 2017

15. CLAS12 Commissioning
Update the commissioning plan with clear priorities with the focus on RGA running configuration
Various commissioning and calibration steps must be supported by simulations. Clear goals and deliverables must be defined for each step.
Break down commissioning plan into must/should/like categories to ease prioritization.
Allocated sufficient time for trigger commissioning
Develop 1-page summaries of the common systems that shift workers can use for guidance and place them in a central location
Ensure successful execution of the plan:
Well defined roles and responsibilities
Clear concise documentation to the shift personnel
Training for both offline and online shift personnel

16. CLARA Offline Reconstruction
Trigger Implementation & Validation
Complete CLAS12 Trigger Implementation and Validation
Comparison between C++ implementation and hardware response
Comparison between C++ implementation and GEANT4 and reconstruction results
GEMC Or
DAQ
(.evio)
Trigger C++
CLARA Offline Reconstruction
NOTE: that step allows Offline Reconstruction team to get ready for trigger results processing during beam time
Develop & document simulations/commissioning plan of the various trigger: rates, efficiency and stability.

17. Online Monitoring
Online monitoring for physics reconstruction in CLAS12 environment should focus on detector occupancy, efficiency and calibration stability.
Need :
Centralized, configurable histogram service to supply occupancy and calibration quality information from all detector sources to monitoring clients.
Automated procedures of detector timeline quality monitoring
Method for setting alarms, notifications, automatic log-entries or database (CCDB,RCDB) entries on out-of-tolerance conditions.
A responsible person should be identified to lead the online monitoring effort

18. Offline Monitoring
Develop physics reactions to be used to monitor data production such:
Basic monitoring as function of time similar to CLAS (Normalized quantities)
Hit Base tracking/sector
Time Base tracking/sector
Electron/sector
Charge hadrons/sector
Tracks in central detector
Protons in central detector
Electron in the FT
Physics reactions
epπ+π- (missing mass with one pion missing, and inv. masses, pπ±, π+π-)
ep->epπ0 (FT & EC/PCAL)
Bethe-Heitler
K+Λ(π-p)

19. Offline Reconstruction Software
Complete the tracking to include the Forward Micromegas
Complete the event builder
Offline focus on detailed understanding of event reconstruction (Tracking and PID) as function of luminosity.
Code Optimization

20. Scope of CLAS12 simulations- Status
Detector simulation/Geometry & QA
Detector digitization
Rate simulations/Luminosity studies at different Solenoid filed
Calibration procedures/calibration challenge
Trigger simulations
Simulations of the CLAS12 for the different Engineering Run configurations
Full chain simulation toward online reconstruction
Event Reconstruction & tracking/PID Resolutions & efficiency
Physics simulations of approved experiments
Detector alignment and distortions
Magnetic field distortions
Optimization of GEMC
Background Merging with physics events
Calibration reactions: Elastic, inelastic, BH…
Machine learning and PID
Machine learning and detector inefficiency …
Including Documentation!!

21. Simulations
Background merge mechanism needs to be implemented so that it can be compared with data and extensively tested.
Perform realistic simulations for detector systems and compared with data such as trigger simulations, normalized raw TOF rates vs. lab angle etc.
Verify the GEMC geometry and match to original drawings.
Prepare high level representative simulation plots to be compared with data such as missing mass resolutions, pi0 mass resolutions, tracking efficiencies as function of lab angle and momentum, neutron detection efficiencies as function of momentum, etc.
Implement mechanism to incorporate run-by-run calibrations into MC so that the simulations can match data in real time.
Consider using a post-processor for run-dependent conditions instead of including them directly into the simulation.
Actively seek offsite computing power for simulations.

22. Documentation
Most of the documentation have been updated since the KPP
Trigger studies and offline documentation need to be documented
All Documentation will be placed in DOCDB under version control

23. Detailed simulations required- Highest priority
Concerns
Trigger rate from the FT
Mitigation plan:
Reduce the energy range for the accepted clusters:in the proposal the range was GeV to select the large W that are necessary for the meson and the cascade spectroscopy but this could be reduced for example to GeV. As a second choice we can use prescaling.
Detailed simulations required- Highest priority
Implementation of DC in the trigger for the required charge hadrons
Operating at high luminosity
Achieved the Full Field of the solenoid
Major improvement to the beam line design based on detailed simulations ongoing
Improvement to the tracking

24. Summary/Priorities Completion of the beam line simulation Trigger
Online/quasi-online monitoring
Completion of all the simulation tasks required for the Commissioning/Engineering run
Completion of event reconstruction
Monitoring of physics quantities
Online reconstruction and time-line monitoring
Detector Calibration
Update the required documentation/training

25. Summary
The focus of the collaboration for the coming few weeks will be on the preparation and the execution of successful engineering run.
We will work with the collaboration to assign manpower (teams and team leaders) early next week to address the priority task list based on the recommendations from the Ready for Science Review to be ready for successful commissioning run.
The collaboration is Ready for Science with the aim of the first results by October 2018.