Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

About N em cut: 20 GeV neutron N(em)=0 N(em)<2 N(em)<5 N(em)<10 N(em)<20 Mean: 140.7 σ: 46.5 Mean: 152.5 σ: 34.5 Mean: 162.1 σ: 31.1 Mean: 167.6 σ: 28.8.

Published by Modified over 9 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "About N em cut: 20 GeV neutron N(em)=0 N(em)<2 N(em)<5 N(em)<10 N(em)<20 Mean: 140.7 σ: 46.5 Mean: 152.5 σ: 34.5 Mean: 162.1 σ: 31.1 Mean: 167.6 σ: 28.8."— Presentation transcript:

1 About N em cut: 20 GeV neutron N(em)=0 N(em)<2 N(em)<5 N(em)<10 N(em)<20 Mean: 140.7 σ: 46.5 Mean: 152.5 σ: 34.5 Mean: 162.1 σ: 31.1 Mean: 167.6 σ: 28.8 Mean: 168.5 σ: 27.9 We get better knowledge of energy resolution, when allowing some small number of hits in ECAL

2 SiD vs. stand alone G4 simulation GeV251020 Mean13.738.381.5156. σ5.411.716.323.8 σ/M0.400.310.200.15 (σ/M) x√E 0.560.680.630.68 GeV251020 Mean8.7330.872.4149. σ4.29.2314.421.5 σ/M0.480.300.200.14 (σ/M) x√E 0.680.670.630.64 Stand alone G4 (34 layers) GeV1251020 Mean6.311.935.583.2176. σ2.66.213.721.829.0 σ/M0.570.520.390.260.17 (σ/M) x√E 0.570.740.860.830.74 GeV1251020 Mean1.767.9632.375.5167. σ1.915.3812.020.529.0 σ/M1.090.680.370.270.17 (σ/M) x√E 1.090.960.830.860.78 KL0KL0KL0KL0 neutron SiD Projection geometry 7.4mm – 12mm cell size Fixed cell size 10mm 7.0mm fixed cell size: 10 GeV pi- N hits (σ) = 93.9 (17.4) 10.mm fixed cell size: 10 GeV pi- N hits (σ) = 86.6 (16.5)

3 Number of hit vs. average cell size Cell size = 7.4mm x ( r (mm)/ 1410.mm), average over one event Average 7.4 – 8.2 mmAverage 8.8 – 9.2 mm Average 9.8 – 10.2 mmAverage 10.8 – 12. mm Mean: 34.6 σ: 10.4 67%/√E Mean: 31.5 σ: 9.73 69%/√E

4 Number of hit vs. average cell size Average 8.8 – 10.2 mm All Mean: 33.9 σ: 11.3 75%/√E Mean: 32.3 σ: 12.0 83%/√E

5 Neutron – KL response K_L N N N Number of hits Number of hits Number of hits Total E (GeV) K.E. (GeV) P (GeV) Neutron and K_L gives different response

Download ppt "About N em cut: 20 GeV neutron N(em)=0 N(em)<2 N(em)<5 N(em)<10 N(em)<20 Mean: 140.7 σ: 46.5 Mean: 152.5 σ: 34.5 Mean: 162.1 σ: 31.1 Mean: 167.6 σ: 28.8."

Similar presentations

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

CBM Calorimeter System CBM collaboration meeting, October 2008 I.Korolko(ITEP, Moscow)
Particle identification in ECAL Alexander Artamonov, Yuri Kharlov IHEP, Protvino CBM collaboration meeting 14-17.10.2008.

Particle identification in ECAL Alexander Artamonov, Yuri Kharlov IHEP, Protvino CBM collaboration meeting
Geant4 simulation of roman pots A. Kupco, P. Ruzicka, M. Tasevsky.

Geant4 simulation of roman pots A. Kupco, P. Ruzicka, M. Tasevsky.
13/02/20071 Event selection methods & First look at new PCB test Manqi Ruan Support & Discussing: Roman Advisor: Z. ZHANG (LAL) & Y. GAO (Tsinghua))

13/02/20071 Event selection methods & First look at new PCB test Manqi Ruan Support & Discussing: Roman Advisor: Z. ZHANG (LAL) & Y. GAO (Tsinghua))
Using  0 mass constraint to improve particle flow ? Graham W. Wilson, Univ. of Kansas, July 27 th 2005 Study prompted by looking at event displays like.

Using  0 mass constraint to improve particle flow ? Graham W. Wilson, Univ. of Kansas, July 27 th 2005 Study prompted by looking at event displays like.
A first look at the digital approach Vishnu V. Zutshi NIU/NICADD.

A first look at the digital approach Vishnu V. Zutshi NIU/NICADD.
PFA on SiDaug05_np Lei Xia ANL-HEP. PFA outline Calibration of calorimeter –Done –Not tuned for clustering algorithm Clustering algorithm –Done: hit density.

PFA on SiDaug05_np Lei Xia ANL-HEP. PFA outline Calibration of calorimeter –Done –Not tuned for clustering algorithm Clustering algorithm –Done: hit density.
GEM DHCAL Simulation Studies J. Yu* Univ. of Texas at Arlington ALCW, July 15, 2003 Cornell University (*on behalf of the UTA team; S. Habib, V. Kaushik,

GEM DHCAL Simulation Studies J. Yu* Univ. of Texas at Arlington ALCW, July 15, 2003 Cornell University (*on behalf of the UTA team; S. Habib, V. Kaushik,
 Performance Goals -> Motivation  Analog/Digital Comparisons  E-flow Algorithm Development  Readout R&D  Summary Optimization of the Hadron Calorimeter.

 Performance Goals -> Motivation  Analog/Digital Comparisons  E-flow Algorithm Development  Readout R&D  Summary Optimization of the Hadron Calorimeter.
Status of MAPS Geometry Simulation Yoshinari Mikami University of Birmingham 17th MAY 2006 MAPS Meeting at Rutherford Appleton Laboratory.

Status of MAPS Geometry Simulation Yoshinari Mikami University of Birmingham 17th MAY 2006 MAPS Meeting at Rutherford Appleton Laboratory.
1 N. Davidson E/p minimum bias update with Athena 12.0.6 Analysis Meeting 12 th June 2007.

1 N. Davidson E/p minimum bias update with Athena Analysis Meeting 12 th June 2007.
MINERvA Simulation - HCAL and ECAL Calorimetry Jaewon Park University of Rochester MINERvA Collaboration Meeting, Sep 29, 2006.

MINERvA Simulation - HCAL and ECAL Calorimetry Jaewon Park University of Rochester MINERvA Collaboration Meeting, Sep 29, 2006.
MINERvA Simulation - HCAL and ECAL Calorimetry Jaewon Park University of Rochester MINERvA Collaboration Meeting, Sep 29, 2006.

MINERvA Simulation - HCAL and ECAL Calorimetry Jaewon Park University of Rochester MINERvA Collaboration Meeting, Sep 29, 2006.
February 8th, 2007Anne-Marie Magnan - Imperial College London 1 Update on clusterisation studies for MAPS Comparison between 2 methods of clustering Geant4/LCIO.

February 8th, 2007Anne-Marie Magnan - Imperial College London 1 Update on clusterisation studies for MAPS Comparison between 2 methods of clustering Geant4/LCIO.
1 Alternative Sampling Configurations – new study 20 GeV photons 30 x 5/7 X 0 20 x 5/7 X 0 + 10 x 10/7 X 0 Total absobed energy Dep energy in Si Leakage.

1 Alternative Sampling Configurations – new study 20 GeV photons 30 x 5/7 X 0 20 x 5/7 X x 10/7 X 0 Total absobed energy Dep energy in Si Leakage.
Potpourri Vishnu V. Zutshi Northern Illinois University.

Potpourri Vishnu V. Zutshi Northern Illinois University.
Results from Non-proj Geom Guilherme, Jeremy and Vishnu.

Results from Non-proj Geom Guilherme, Jeremy and Vishnu.
More on Testbeam Analysis FLZ. Stability Checks for TCMT Pedestal stability already shown by Kurt MIP calibration stability Response stability.

More on Testbeam Analysis FLZ. Stability Checks for TCMT Pedestal stability already shown by Kurt MIP calibration stability Response stability.
SiD Cal R. Frey1 Some EGS Studies… Compare with Geant4  Questions of range/cutoff parameters EM Resolution understood? Moliere radius – readout gap relation.

SiD Cal R. Frey1 Some EGS Studies… Compare with Geant4  Questions of range/cutoff parameters EM Resolution understood? Moliere radius – readout gap relation.
Certifying Geant4-based calorimeter simulations for the LCD Dhiman Chakraborty, Guilherme Lima, Jeremy McCormick, Vishnu Zutshi NICADD, NIU ALCWG-Cal Meeting.

Certifying Geant4-based calorimeter simulations for the LCD Dhiman Chakraborty, Guilherme Lima, Jeremy McCormick, Vishnu Zutshi NICADD, NIU ALCWG-Cal Meeting.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google