1. Marcel Stanitzki 1 More results... SiD PFA Meeting 04.06.2008 M. Stanitzki

2. Marcel Stanitzki 2 Segmentation studies First approach  keep the total HCAL thickness constant  vary steel thickness and number of scintillator layers  Detector tags SIDish_v2_hcalXX (XX= number of layers) ‏ Second approach  keep λ Ironl constant at n λ  vary steel thickness and number of scintillator layers  Detector tags SIDish_v2_hcalXX_lYY XX= number of layers) ‏ YY= number of lambda

3. Marcel Stanitzki 3 The variants Some Comments  different Mokka compared to all other studies  SIDish_v2_hcal40 is the “standard” SiDish ! λ Iron  λ done with λ Iron =168 mm and λ Scint =795 mm  note: there is some more material between HCAL and ECAL

4. Marcel Stanitzki 4 The results

5. Marcel Stanitzki 5 λ Iron Fixed 4.5 λ Iron SIDish_v2_hcalXX_l45

6. Marcel Stanitzki 6 Number of layers

7. Marcel Stanitzki 7 λ Total

8. Marcel Stanitzki 8 λ Iron

9. Marcel Stanitzki 9 n Layers / λ Iron

10. Marcel Stanitzki 10 Fixed total thickness SIDish_v2_hcalXX

11. Marcel Stanitzki 11 Number of layers

12. Marcel Stanitzki 12 λ Total

13. Marcel Stanitzki 13 λ Iron

14. Marcel Stanitzki 14 n Layers / λ Iron

15. Marcel Stanitzki 15 λ Iron Fixed 5.0 λ Iron SIDish_v2_hcalXX_l45

16. Marcel Stanitzki 16

17. Marcel Stanitzki 17 Playing with the ECAL Point raised by Harry, is the ECAL optimal ?  we see a benefit going from 20+10 to 30+10 layers  better segmentation helps ?  or just pure thickness ?  Effect is ~ 2 % Made a SiDish_ecal_q37  SiDish with 37 layers but same overall thickness Make a SIDish_ecal25_50  20+10 layers  2.5 mm /5.0 mm tungsten thickness and smaller gaps (1 mm) ‏  will change global radius (very small effect) ‏

18. Marcel Stanitzki 18 Some results

19. Marcel Stanitzki 19 some plots

20. Marcel Stanitzki 20 Z dependence Taking the standard samples and looking in the forward... 0.9< cosθ Thrust < 1.0, so integrating everything in that region This is way less statistics plus there are two jets and not one well defined u-quark !

21. Marcel Stanitzki 21 Some help... cosθ=0.71 cosθ=0.92 cosθ=0.9 LDC00Sc SIDish_r125_z19 SIDish

22. Marcel Stanitzki 22 at 91 GeV

23. Marcel Stanitzki 23 at 200 GeV

24. Marcel Stanitzki 24 Energy Dependence

25. Marcel Stanitzki 25 Let's Play Fit the z and B dependence for the forward region  Proposed function : For 91 GeV Fit wants no B-Field Dependence: For 200 GeV there is very weak B-Field Dependence (ignored) suggests increase with May require a few more points

26. Marcel Stanitzki 26 First result

27. Marcel Stanitzki 27 Fitting z and Energy Ignoring B... Fitting again need more points and statistics for  B field  Calorimeter impact  These Effects are in the noise so far

28. Marcel Stanitzki 28 Z dependence (II) ‏ Due to popular request by a single gentleman Norman kindly generated u jets going at cos(θ)=0.92 for three energies: 50, 100, 250 250 GeV done for LDC00Sc and SIDish  something funny, which needs cross-checking  it looks like they are all over the place not only at cos(θ)=0.92

29. Marcel Stanitzki 29 Some Plots LDC00Sc SiDish

30. Marcel Stanitzki 30 250 GeV LDC00Sc SiDish

31. Marcel Stanitzki 31 Results

32. Marcel Stanitzki 32 Some plots

33. Marcel Stanitzki 33 Some plots (II) ‏

34. Marcel Stanitzki 34 Using the other fit model Doesn't really work so well, but didn't really expect it to either as we are having 1 jet vs. two jets etc....

35. Marcel Stanitzki 35 Start from scratch Use same model as before  B dependent term set to 0 For 50 GeV Jet Fit For 100 GeV Jet Fit:

36. Marcel Stanitzki 36 Results

37. Marcel Stanitzki 37 Results (II) ‏

38. Marcel Stanitzki 38 Z dependence There is a linear dependence between energy resolution and z Both studies tell the same story  a longer SiD is better  For physics with two jets effect is more pronounced B field has little impact  one wouldn't expect Ron's comment from Monday  segmentation, radius and B field all add up here Don;t really understand the small differences between 50 and 100 GeV jets...

39. Marcel Stanitzki 39 Plans for 4.5/5.0 λ generate a 60 layer version to see a turnover effect (like for the fixed total thickness) ‏ Generate another set  5.5 λ Iron 30,40,50,60 layers  3.5 λ Iron 30,40,50,60 layers That should cover it Run a few points using 180 GeV Jets...

40. Marcel Stanitzki 40 Conclusions HCAL seems to say λ Iron is important  layers/λ Iron is important  need more samples ECAL prefers fine segmentation  in the first layers Depth is a good thing A longer detector is better...