Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Pixel Upgrade Workshop Grindelwald, August 29 th 2012 PERFORMANCE AND PHYSICS RESULTS FOR PHASE1 UPGRADE Alessia Tricomi (University and INFN Catania)

Published byKaren Todd Modified over 9 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Pixel Upgrade Workshop Grindelwald, August 29 th 2012 PERFORMANCE AND PHYSICS RESULTS FOR PHASE1 UPGRADE Alessia Tricomi (University and INFN Catania)"— Presentation transcript:

1 Pixel Upgrade Workshop Grindelwald, August 29 th 2012 PERFORMANCE AND PHYSICS RESULTS FOR PHASE1 UPGRADE Alessia Tricomi (University and INFN Catania) on behalf of the Tracker Upgrade Simulation Group

2 Performance studies  The goal for the TDR was to show improvement in Physics cases and robustness of the new design.  Focus on relative improvement of the upgrade wrt current geometry.  Two complementary approaches:  Show improvements in basic building blocks for physics using a full (Geant) simulation of the upgrade Demonstrate improvements in tracking efficiency and fake rate Demonstrate improved IP resolution and b-tagging performance  Improvements in relevant physics channels (under PC responsibility) Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 2

3 Pixel Upgrade dictionary Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi  Current Detector:  Current pixel detector geometry (3 barrel layers, 2 disks)  Current beam pipe  Dedicated “SLHC” release CMSSW_4_2_8_SLHC2 to use Design/Ideal conditions and same configurations/settings for tracking  Phase1 Upgrade (R30F12) geometry:  Upgrade geometry with 4 BPIX layers and 3 endcap disks First barrel layer at R=30 with 12 faces New detailed material description according to PSI drawings New beampipe (Sunanda) implemented  CMSSW_4_2_8_SLHCtk + 520 backporting 3

4 Upgrade Studies  Study at  2×10 34 cm -2 s -1 at 25ns (50ns), =50 (100)  1×10 34 cm -2 s -1 at 25 ns, =25  zero PU  Dynamic data loss (due to pixel ROC) used in simulations  Tracking steps modified for upgrade geometry and high PU  Using CMSSW_4_2_8 but with 5_2_0 tracking backported  Dropped detached tracking steps (see backup slides)  Used regular CMS DQM validation packages to get tracking and b-tagging performance plots  Fullsim, 14 TeV, ideal conditions, no pixel CPE templates used  ttbar from PYTHIA (10K events)  Muon gun (10K events-4 muons/event, generated flat in pT and eta, 200k events-ten muons/event, generated flat in p and eta) Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 4

5 Data loss for Upgrade Studies Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi  Peak luminosity values Current DetectorRadius (cm) % Data loss at 1  10 34 @25ns % Data loss at 2  10 34 @25ns % Data loss at 2  10 34 @50ns BPIX14.44.01650 BPIX27.31.55.818.2 BPIX310.20.73.09.3 FPIX1&20.73.09.3 Phase 1 DetectorRadius (cm) % Data loss at 1  10 34 @25ns % Data loss at 2  10 34 @25ns % Data loss at 2  10 34 @50ns BPIX13.01.192.384.76 BPIX26.80.230.460.93 BPIX310.90.090.180.36 BPIX416.00.040.080.17 FPIX1-30.090.180.36 5

6 Upgrade Iterative Tracking (Stdgeom) Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi  5_2_0 tracking for current pixel geometry (from “2012 tune”)  Close to 5_2_0 tracking, use steps 0-2, and 4A (for high eta)  Reduce step 4A d 0 cut to reduce CPU and memory usage IterationSeedsp T cut (GeV) d 0 cut (cm) d z cut (cm) Min hits 0pixel triplets0.60.024.0σ bs 3 1low p T pixel triplets0.20.024.0σ bs 3 2pixel pairs with vtx0.60.0154.0σ bs 3 3 detached triplets0.31.515.03 4Apixel +(TEC(1 ring)) triplets 0.40.0210.03 4BBPIX+TIB triplets0.61.510.03 5TIB, TID, TEC pairs (fewer) 0.72.010.04 6TOB, TEC pairs0.66.030.06 Release CMSSW_4_2_8_SLHCstd2_patch1 Tracking steps 6

7 Upgrade Iterative Tracking (Phase 1) Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi  5_2_0 tracking for Phase 1 geometry (not optimized)  Make close to 5_2_0 tracking, use steps 0-2, and 4A, add step “-1”  Step 3 (pixel pairs) to recover efficiency in eta ~1.2–1.4 region IterationSeedsp T cut (GeV) d 0 cut (cm) d z cut (cm) Min hits 0pixel quadruplets0.60.024.0σ bs 3 1pixel triplets0.60.024.0σ bs 3 2low p T pixel triplets0.20.024.0σ bs 3 3pixel pairs with vtx0.60.0154.0σ bs 3 3old detached triplets0.31.515.03 4Apixel +(TEC(1 ring)) triplets 0.40.0210.03 4BBPIX+TIB triplets0.61.510.03 5TIB, TID, TEC pairs (fewer) 0.72.010.04 6TOB, TEC pairs0.66.030.06 Release CMSSW_4_2_8_SLHCtk3_patch1 Tracking steps 7

8 Pixel Upgrade Material Budget  Reduced material even with more layers “Volumes”Mass (g) CurrentDesign Upgrade BPIX  <2.16 168016618 FPIX  <2.50 85827024 Rad. Len.Nucl. Int. Len. Dots – Upgrade Green – Curr geom Pixels Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 8 50% less photon conversion in/before pixel at eta 1.5

9 Transverse and Longitudinal IP Primary Vertex Tracking Btagging Robustness Object performance Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 9

10 Impact Parameter Resolutions 10  Transverse: muon sample (10 muons/event), zero pileup  Generated flat in E and eta (plot vs absolute p and in 4 eta regions)  Compare current and upgrade detectors (modified MTV) Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi

11 Impact Parameter Resolutions  Longitudinal: muon sample (10 muons/event), zero pileup  Generated flat in E and eta (plot vs absolute p and in 4 eta regions)  Compare current and upgrade detectors Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 11

12 Impact Parameter Resolutions  Transverse: muon sample (10 muons/event), =50  Generated flat in E and eta (plot vs absolute p and in 4 eta regions)  Compare current and upgrade detectors Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 12

13 Impact Parameter Resolutions  Longitudinal: muon sample (10 muons/event), =50  Generated flat in E and eta (plot vs absolute p and in 4 eta regions)  Compare current and upgrade detectors Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 13

14 Primary Vertex Resolution  ttbar sample, zero PU and =50 Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 14

15 Tracking in ttbar 15  ttbar sample,  High purity  p T > 0.9 GeV/c Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi

16 Tracking with muons  Muon sample  High purity  p T >1 GeV/c  num tracking layers with hits >= 8 Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 16

17 Tracking Efficiency/Fake Rate  ttbar sample, compare current and upgrade detectors  High purity, p T > 0.9 GeV/c Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 17

18 Tracking vs PU  Average tracking efficiencies vs PU  ttbar, high purity tracks, p T > 0.9 GeV/c Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 18

19 Tracking vs PU  Average track fake rates vs PU  ttbar, high purity tracks, p T > 0.9 GeV/c Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 19

20 B-tagging Performance  ttbar, CSV tagger, compare current and upgrade  ak5PFjets PFnoPU, jet p T > 30 GeV, DUS,c,b jets 15% absolute gain in b jet efficiency for 1% fake rate Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 20

21 B-tagging Performance  ttbar, CSV tagger, compare current and upgrade, =100  ak5PFjets PFnoPU, jet p T > 30 GeV, DUS,c,b jets Improvement even more impressive at 100 PU Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 21

22 B tagging performance Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 22  Upgrade as good or better at high pileup as current at low pileup Upgrade PU50 Current PU0 Upgrade PU50 Current PU25

23 B-tagging Performance vs PU  ttbar, CSV tagger, compare current and upgrade, =50  ak5PFjets PFnoPU, jet p T > 30 GeV, DUS,b jets  Much better handling high Pile-Up Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 23

24 Robustness: BPIX1 Inefficiency Study  Vary inefficiency of BPIX layer 1: 0%, 5%, 10%, 20%  All other layers at 100%  ttbar, =50, light quark mis-tag=1%  Upgrade detector more robust to BPIX1 inefficiency Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 24

25 Robustness: BPIX1 Inefficiency Study  Vary inefficiency of BPIX layer 1: 0%, 5%, 10%, 20%  All other layers at 100%  ttbar, =50, high purity tracks, p T >0.9 GeV/c  Upgrade detector more robust to BPIX1 inefficiency Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 25

26 TIB Inefficiency Study  Switch off certain modules (in black below)  List provided by Frank Hartmann  Or consider a uniform 20% inefficiency in TIB1,2 Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 26

27 Robustness to TIB degradation Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 27 With Dead Modules With 20% uniform inefficiency in TIB1,2 Upgrade detector more robust wrt TIB loss

28 Small pixel scenario: tracking with ttbar at 100PU Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 28 BPIX Layer1: pixel size 75x100  m 2, 220  m thickness ROC threshold 1200 e - instead of 2000 Significant improvement at 100 PU wrt Upgrade Phase1 detector Good news towards Phase2

29 Small pixel scenario: btagging performance Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 29 BPIX Layer1: pixel size 75x100  m 2, 220  m thickness ROC threshold 1200 e - instead of 2000 No data loss Significant improvement at 100 PU wrt Upgrade Phase1 detector Good news towards Phase2

30 ZH  llbb H  ZZ  4l SUSY M T2 SUSY  +MET All analysis show relative improvement and have not been optimized/retuned for high PU Physics Performance Grindelwald, 29/08/12 30 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi

31 ZH  llbb Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 31  Analysis based on: 1. triggering on lepton events; 2. kinematic reconstruction of Z from isolated dileptons; 3. reconstructing invariant mass from two b-tagged jets; 4. multivariate final variable  Higher muon/electron ID efficiency helps with (1-2), better b-tagging helps with (3-4)  Compare relative performance of current detector and upgrade at 14 TeV with 50 pileup events

32 ZH   bb event selection Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 32

33 ZH   bb cut flow Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 33 Values greater than 1 show increased efficiency for the Phase1 upgrade and vice versa

34 ZH  eebb event selection Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 34  Same selection as for muons but  Electrons use 95% working-point of VBTF  Isolation is relaxed as in the di-muon analysis  Dimuon mass ~2 GeV high, so Z mass cut increased by +2 GeV like in dimuon analysis  Other criteria same as for di-muon channel

35 ZH  eebb cut flow Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 35 Values greater than 1 show increased efficiency for the Phase1 upgrade and vice versa

36 ZH  llbb results Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 36  ZH   bb  65% relative gain in signal efficiency for di-muon channel  75% gain with single muon HLT  175% gain with dimuon HLT (upgrade detector barely affected by the three pixel hit requirement)  ZH  eebb  65% relative gain in signal efficiency for di-electron channel  Not enough MC to properly estimate total reductions in backgrounds

37 H  ZZ  4l Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 37  Analysis based on: 1. triggering on di-lepton events; 2. kinematic reconstruction of 2 Zs from isolated di-leptons; 3. reconstructing invariant mass of Higgs  Higher muon/electron ID efficiency helps with (1-2)  Compare relative performance of current detector and upgrade at 14 TeV with 50 pileup events

38 H  ZZ  4l event selection Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 38  Using same cuts as in 2012 analysis (HIG-12-016)  PF leptons used  Electrons p T > 7 GeV, | η | 5 GeV, | η | < 2.4  Isolation relaxed from 0.15 to 5.0  |SIP 3D |<4 for each lepton  40 4GeV  m 4l > 100 GeV  same HLT estimate as in ZH: 3+ pixel hits on trigger leptons

39 H  ZZ  4  cut flow Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 39 Values greater than 1 show increased efficiency for the Phase1 upgrade and vice versa 40% gain in 4  channel

40 H  ZZ  4e cut flow Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 40 Values greater than 1 show increased efficiency for the Phase1 upgrade and vice versa 50% gain in 4e channel

41 H  ZZ  2e2  cut flow Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 41 Values greater than 1 show increased efficiency for the Phase1 upgrade and vice versa 48% gain in 2e2  channel

42 SUSY M T2 b analysis Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 42  Fully hadronic final states with large MET  B jets coming from cascade decay of gluino and squark to third generation sbottom, stop  SUSY particles identified through the discovery parameter M T2  Tail of Supersimmetric Transverse Mass related to parent sparticle mass (endpoint)  Compare relative performance of current detector and upgrade at 14 TeV with 50 pileup events wrt to btagging improvement  Signal: LM9 benchmark point  Bkg: ttbar  See AN-2012/275 for details

43 SUSY M T2 b event selection Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 43  Good primary vertes  Veto electrons: p T >10 GeV/c; | η |<2.4; |d0|<0.04cm; |dz|<1.0cm; missing inner hits<2; PFIso<2.0  Veto muons: p T >10 GeV/c; | η | 10; Pix hits>0; PFIso<2.0  Jets: 2 PF jets with p T > 20 GeV/c passing loose JetID; veto events with jets p T >50 GeV/c but failing jet ID  MET: PFMET>30GeV;PFH >750GeV  B-tag: Tight CSV tag > 0.898

44 SUSY M T2 b analysis Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 44 Before any b-taggingOne b-jet required 20% higher signal selection efficiency can be obtained without any real optimization for the new detector and high pile-up.

45 SUSY  +MET analysis Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 45  Di-photon events+MET signature for SUSY  No significant SM bkg, small contribution from V   Main bkg comes from fake MET  See AN-2012/269  Same 14 TeV, 50 pileup scenario as others  Main improvement comes from fake rate reduction

46 SUSY  +MET analysis Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 46  Events divided in four classes: ,  e, ee, fake-fake   e and ee samples used to estimate fake rate by fitting Z peak

47 SUSY  +MET analysis Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 47  Fake rate 7.0% for the current detector and 1.25% for Phase1 pixel detectors  Fake rate with the upgrade detector at 50 PU is comparable with the performance of the current detector in low luminosity run

48 Conclusions Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 48  All results show that the new detector at high PU performs as well or even better than the current detector at low luminosity  The results also show that the new detector is fairly robust against possible inefficiency in BPIX1 and TIB1,2  All the results have been approved by Tracking/btagging/Physics group – PAS SUS-12-020  Improvements from the new design are broad and substantial and will have a significant impact our physics program  Still a lot of work to be done to tune algorithms and analysis for high PU scenario  Stay tuned!

49 Back-up slides Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 49

50 Tracking for Upgrade Studies Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi  Use 4_2_8 but with 5_2_0 tracking, and drop detached trks  Fullsim, 14 TeV, ideal conditions, no pixel templates  Regular CMS validation package, current and upgrade pixel det IterationSeedsp T cut (GeV) d 0 cut (cm) d z cut (cm) Min hits 0pixel triplets0.60.024.0σ bs 3 1low p T pixel triplets0.20.024.0σ bs 3 2pixel pairs with vtx0.60.0154.0σ bs 3 3 detached triplets0.31.515.03 4Apixel +(TEC(1 ring)) triplets 0.41.510.03 4BBPIX+TIB triplets0.61.510.03 5TIB, TID, TEC pairs (fewer) 0.72.010.04 6TOB, TEC pairs0.66.030.06 Regular 5_2_0 Tracking steps 50

51 Impact Parameter Resolutions  Transverse: muon sample (10 muons/event), zero pileup  Generated flat in E and eta (plot vs absolute p and in 4 eta regions)  Compare with/without (50PU) dynamic data loss for current detector Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 51

52 Impact Parameter Resolutions  Longitudinal: muon sample (10 muons/event), zero pileup  Generated flat in E and eta (plot vs absolute p and in 4 eta regions)  Compare with/without (50PU) dynamic data loss for current detector Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 52

53 Primary Vertex Resolution  ttbar sample, zero PU and =50  Compare with/without (50PU) dynamic data loss for current detector Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 53

54 Tracking Efficiency and Fake Rates  Average tracking efficiencies, high purity, p T >0.9 GeV SampleStdgeom Efficiency (%)Phase 1 Efficiency (%) Mu PU0 pt0.9,8hit97.4 ± 0.198.1 ± 0.1 Mu PU0 pt0.9,8hit, dloss93.9 ± 0.197.9 ± 0.1 Mu PU50 pt0.9,8hit90.1 ± 0.294.9 ± 0.1 Mu PU50 pt0.9,8hit, dloss81.5 ± 0.294.4 ± 0.1 ttbar PU0 pt0.989.6 ± 0.193.5 ± 0.1 ttbar PU0 pt0.9, dloss85.6 ± 0.193.2 ± 0.1 ttbar PU50 pt0.984.9 ± 0.192.2 ± 0.1 ttbar PU50 pt0.9, dloss79.7 ± 0.192.0 ± 0.1 Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 54

55 Tracking Efficiency & Fake rate 55  Using Standard validation packages: MultiTrackValidator Tracking efficiency = #sim trks assoc. to reco trk #sim trks (for signal sim tracks only) Tracking fake rate = #reco trks not assoc. to sim trk #reco trks (for “all” reco tracks) Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi

56 Tracking Efficiency/Fake Rate  ttbar sample, current detector  generalTracks, p T > 0.1 GeV/c Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 56

57 Tracking Efficiency/Fake Rate  ttbar sample, upgrade pixel detector detector  generalTracks, p T > 0.1 GeV/c Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 57

58 Tracking Efficiency/Fake Rate  ttbar sample, compare current and upgrade detectors  generalTracks, p T > 0.1 GeV/c Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 58

59 B-tagging Performance (BPIX1 Study)  ttbar, CSV tagger, current detector, =50, compare BPIX1  ak5PFjets PFnoPU, jet p T > 30 GeV, DUS,b jets All other layers are at 100% efficiency Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 59

60 B-tagging Performance (BPIX1 Study)  ttbar, CSV tagger, upgrade detector, =50, compare BPIX1  ak5PFjets PFnoPU, jet p T > 30 GeV, DUS,b jets All other layers are at 100% efficiency Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 60

61 Outer Tracker Inefficiency Study  Uniform 20% inefficiency in TIB1,2: zero PU and =50  ttbar sample, high purity tracks, p T >0.9 GeV/c Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 61

62 Outer Tracker Inefficiency Study  Uniform 20% inefficiency in TIB1,2: zero PU and =50  ttbar sample, high purity tracks, p T >0.9 GeV/c  Upgrade detector more robust to Outer Tracker inefficiency Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 62

63 Outer Tracker Inefficiency Study  Dead Modules in Outer Tracker: zero PU and =50  ttbar sample, high purity tracks, p T >0.9 GeV/c Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 63

64 Outer Tracker Inefficiency Study  Dead Modules in Outer Tracker: zero PU and =50  ttbar sample, high purity tracks, p T >0.9 GeV/c Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 64

65 H  ZZ  4l analysis Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 65 Isolation

66 HZ  bbll Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 66 Di-lepton requirement

67 H  ZZ  4l analysis Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 67 More pixel hits for muon tracks

68 H  ZZ  4l analysis Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 68 Better IP

69 H  ZZ  4l analysis Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 69 Better Z mass resolution

70 SUSY M T2 analysis Grindelwald, 29/08/12 Pixel Upgrade Meeting Alessia Tricomi 70

Download ppt "Pixel Upgrade Workshop Grindelwald, August 29 th 2012 PERFORMANCE AND PHYSICS RESULTS FOR PHASE1 UPGRADE Alessia Tricomi (University and INFN Catania)"

Similar presentations

Impact parameter studies with early data from ATLAS

Impact parameter studies with early data from ATLAS
Sparticle reconstruction in dilepton final state M. Chiorboli, M. Galanti & A. Tricomi University & INFN Catania CMS Physics Review I. SUSY/BSM CERN, 20-21.

Sparticle reconstruction in dilepton final state M. Chiorboli, M. Galanti & A. Tricomi University & INFN Catania CMS Physics Review I. SUSY/BSM CERN,
B-tagging, leptons and missing energy in ATLAS after first data Ivo van Vulpen (Nikhef) on behalf of the ATLAS collaboration.

B-tagging, leptons and missing energy in ATLAS after first data Ivo van Vulpen (Nikhef) on behalf of the ATLAS collaboration.
Guoming CHEN12015-5-4 The Capability of CMS Detector Chen Guoming IHEP, CAS 2008.10.24, Beijing.

Guoming CHEN The Capability of CMS Detector Chen Guoming IHEP, CAS , Beijing.
Recent Results on the Possibility of Observing a Standard Model Higgs Boson Decaying to WW (*) Majid Hashemi University of Antwerp, Belgium.

Recent Results on the Possibility of Observing a Standard Model Higgs Boson Decaying to WW (*) Majid Hashemi University of Antwerp, Belgium.
CMS High Level Trigger Selection Giuseppe Bagliesi INFN-Pisa On behalf of the CMS collaboration EPS-HEP 2003 Aachen, Germany.

CMS High Level Trigger Selection Giuseppe Bagliesi INFN-Pisa On behalf of the CMS collaboration EPS-HEP 2003 Aachen, Germany.
1  trigger optimization in CMS Tracker Giuseppe Bagliesi On behalf of  tracking group Workshop on B/tau Physics at LHC Helsinki, May 30 - June 1, 2002.

1  trigger optimization in CMS Tracker Giuseppe Bagliesi On behalf of  tracking group Workshop on B/tau Physics at LHC Helsinki, May 30 - June 1, 2002.
Top Turns Ten March 2 nd, 2005. Measurement of the Top Quark Mass The Low Bias Template Method using Lepton + jets events Kevin Black, Meenakshi Narain.

Top Turns Ten March 2 nd, Measurement of the Top Quark Mass The Low Bias Template Method using Lepton + jets events Kevin Black, Meenakshi Narain.
Daniele Benedetti CMS and University of Perugia Chicago 07/02/2004 High Level Trigger for the ttH channel in fully hadronic decay at LHC with the CMS detector.

Daniele Benedetti CMS and University of Perugia Chicago 07/02/2004 High Level Trigger for the ttH channel in fully hadronic decay at LHC with the CMS detector.
1 introduction sample: W’  tb  Wbb  eνbb/μνbb generator: PYTHIA five samples with W’ mass: 300GeV, 500GeV, 1000GeV, 1500GeV, 2000GeV number of events.

1 introduction sample: W’  tb  Wbb  eνbb/μνbb generator: PYTHIA five samples with W’ mass: 300GeV, 500GeV, 1000GeV, 1500GeV, 2000GeV number of events.
ADR for Massimiliano Chiorboli Universita’ and INFN Catania

ADR for Massimiliano Chiorboli Universita’ and INFN Catania
1 The CMS Heavy Ion Program Michael Murray Kansas.

1 The CMS Heavy Ion Program Michael Murray Kansas.
1 Viktor Veszprémi (Purdue University, CDF Collaboration) SUSY 2005, Durham Search for the SM Higgs Boson at the CDF Experiment Search for the SM Higgs.

1 Viktor Veszprémi (Purdue University, CDF Collaboration) SUSY 2005, Durham Search for the SM Higgs Boson at the CDF Experiment Search for the SM Higgs.
Tau Jet Identification in Charged Higgs Search Monoranjan Guchait TIFR, Mumbai India-CMS collaboration meeting 27-28 th March,2009 University of Delhi.

Tau Jet Identification in Charged Higgs Search Monoranjan Guchait TIFR, Mumbai India-CMS collaboration meeting th March,2009 University of Delhi.
LCWS 2004, ParisSonja Hillert, University of Oxfordp. 1 Flavour tagging performance analysis for vertex detectors LCWS 2004, Paris Sonja Hillert (Oxford)

LCWS 2004, ParisSonja Hillert, University of Oxfordp. 1 Flavour tagging performance analysis for vertex detectors LCWS 2004, Paris Sonja Hillert (Oxford)
H → ZZ →  A promising new channel for high Higgs mass Sara Bolognesi – Torino INFN and University Higgs meeting 23 Sept. 2008 – CMS Week.

H → ZZ →  A promising new channel for high Higgs mass Sara Bolognesi – Torino INFN and University Higgs meeting 23 Sept – CMS Week.
Archana Sharma, Suman Beri Panjab University Chandigarh India-CMS meeting TIFR, Jan. 2011 1 Updates on the RPC trigger efficiency work with data driven.

Archana Sharma, Suman Beri Panjab University Chandigarh India-CMS meeting TIFR, Jan Updates on the RPC trigger efficiency work with data driven.
Performance of Track and Vertex Reconstruction and B-Tagging Studies with CMS in pp Collisions at sqrt(s)=7 TeV Boris Mangano University of California,

Performance of Track and Vertex Reconstruction and B-Tagging Studies with CMS in pp Collisions at sqrt(s)=7 TeV Boris Mangano University of California,
HERA-LHC, CERN Oct.11 2004 Preliminary study of Z+b in ATLAS /1 A preliminary study of Z+b production in ATLAS The D0 measurement of  (Z+b)/  (Z+jet)

HERA-LHC, CERN Oct Preliminary study of Z+b in ATLAS /1 A preliminary study of Z+b production in ATLAS The D0 measurement of  (Z+b)/  (Z+jet)
Operation of the CMS Tracker at the Large Hadron Collider

Operation of the CMS Tracker at the Large Hadron Collider

Similar presentations

Ads by Google