1. FTK update H→  Tony, Catalin By speeding up/adding rejection at LVL2, we can have a higher rate coming in from LVL1. Therefore some of the LVL1 threshold may be decreased or have new triggers Last meeting investigated 3 such thresholds: –Lepton P T – helps the most – will focus on this –Missing E T and Tau E T have smaller impact We looked at L2 track-based cuts to reduce the dijet background (which we assume is the dominant source of fake triggers)

2. LVL1 trigger table 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 LOW-LUMHIGH-LUM MU20(20) 2MU6 EM25I(30) 2EM15I(20) J200(290) 3J90(130) 4J65(90) J60+xE60(100+100) TAU25+xE30(60+60) MU10+EM15I Lepton E T Tau E T Missing E T 15,20,25,30 10,15,20,25 10,15,20

3. Fake rates for Sherpa studies Ordinary jets can fake electrons, muons and taus Junichi Tanaka (ICEPP, Univ. of TOKYO) 11/24/05

5. Trigger Rates Dijet Trigger rates with default low luminosity trigger table: Using Erik’s latest parameterization for  jets and using fake lepton rates given in backup slide we find the following L1 rates: –Single jet: 225 Hz –Met+tau: 130 Hz –Single Lepton: 1.3 kHz –Other very small Need to vary L1 lepton threshold and tune it to the desired L2 output –Need some guidance with rates/L2 timing This is with P T >20/25 GeV/c. Can we go lower with FTK at L2?

6. Multiplicity plots. Cone 0.1, 0.2, 0.4 Jets: Et>15 GeV and |eta| < 2.4 Tracks Pt > 0.5 GeV

7. 0.1<R<0.4 0.2<R<0.4 RIRI RORO

8. Different Cut Scenarios - Dijet <=4 ==0 <=3 ==0 <=3 <=1 <=2 ==0 <=2 <=1 <=2 <=1 ==0 <=1 <=2 6.26.020.45.418.537.03.613.026.9 18.215.638.011.127.140.65.313.120.0 8.27.924.87.122.741.34.816.431.6 22.419.542.214.231.744.47.116.524.3 -Sherpa dijet samples. Jets with Et>15, |eta| 0.5 GeV Need to look at signal as well -Cut scenario: R I =0.1, 0.2 and R O –R I track multiplicity cuts (R O =0.4) -Values are: % of jets passing, and % of events passing

9. Different Cut Scenarios - Signal <=4 ==0 <=3 ==0 <=3 <=1 <=2 ==0 <=2 <=1 <=2 <=1 ==0 <=1 <=2 32.531.653.027.247.558.625.943.052.4 65.864.184.158.479.585.055.175.581.4 46.343.661.537.252.558.132.144.148.3 78.776.487.170.181.784.663.775.678.7 -Higgs 130 GeV samples. Same requirements on jets and tracks Need to look at signal as well -Cut scenario: R I =0.1, 0.2 and R O –R I track multiplicity cuts (R O =0.4) -Values are: % of jets passing, and % of events passing

10. <=4 ==0 <=3 ==0 <=3 <=1 <=2 ==0 <=2 <=1 <=2 <=1 ==0 <=1 <=2 46.343.661.537.252.558.132.144.148.3 18.215.638.011.127.140.65.313.120.0 22.419.542.214.231.744.47.116.524.3 <=4 ==0 <=3 ==0 <=3 <=1 <=2 ==0 <=2 <=1 <=2 <=1 ==0 <=1 <=2 78.776.487.170.181.784.663.775.678.7 Best case scenario uses R I =0.2 Trigger goal should be to maximize efficiency with acceptable rate (not necessarily maximize S/sqrt(S+B)) Pick the first one for now (<=1 ==0). R=0.1 signal top/background bottom R=0.2 signal top/background bottom

11. Conclusions/Plans We can increase H→  acceptance with lower thresholds at L1 at the cost of higher L1 output rate (duh) –Recover rejection at L2 with track multiplicity cuts –We have the tools to study L2 rejection with track mult cuts, but need guidance regarding acceptable rates into L2 –Also need to implement additional (standard) calorimeter cuts at L2