Alignment with beam halo MC Andrea Parenti 05/05/2009 Outline: - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
alignment with beam halo mc
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Alignment with beam halo MC Andrea Parenti 05/05/2009 Outline: - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jul 07, 2023 122 likes •261 views

Alignment with beam halo MC Andrea Parenti 05/05/2009 Outline: Alignment with Beam Halo (BH) only Alignment with Minimum Bias (MB) only Alignment with BH + MB 05/05/2009 A. Parenti 1 Initial

slide-1
SLIDE 1

05/05/2009

  • A. Parenti

1

Alignment with beam halo MC

Andrea Parenti 05/05/2009 Outline:

  • Alignment with Beam Halo (BH) only
  • Alignment with Minimum Bias (MB) only
  • Alignment with BH + MB
slide-2
SLIDE 2

05/05/2009

  • A. Parenti

2

Initial geometry and parameters

  • Alignment is done of High level structures:

'TIDRingsLayers13,110001', 'TrackerTECDiskLayers11,cc000c', 'TrackerTECDiskLayers24,110001', 'TrackerTECDiskLayers55,cc000c', 'TrackerTECDiskLayers69,110001'

  • Start from ideal geometry + custom misalignent
✁

TIDRings & TECDisks as in 10pbScenario

✂

TIDRings: 185 µm (u,v), 850µrad (γ)

✂

TECDisks: 70 µm (u,v), 30 µrad (γ)

✁

no misalignment applied on smaller structures, and on the barrel sub-detectors

slide-3
SLIDE 3

05/05/2009

  • A. Parenti

3

Alignment with beam halo

  • Based on 20X beam halo Monte Carlo
✁

the available statistics is limited: ~60k events

  • Track collection: ALCARECOTkAlBeamHalo
  • Track selection:
✁

ptMin = 0.

✁

etaMin = -999. / etaMax = +999.

✁

nHitMin = 6 / nHitMin2D = 2

✁

chi2nMax = 50.

✁

minMultiplicity = 1

  • Nb. of selected tracks: ~31200
slide-4
SLIDE 4

05/05/2009

  • A. Parenti

4

Alignment with BH: TEC results

  • Initial and remaining

misalignment:

end0Clone

Entries 14 Mean 1 RMS 2.643

m] µ u [ ∆

  • 100 -80 -60 -40 -20

20 40 60 80 100 #parameters 1 2 3 4 5 6

end0Clone

Entries 14 Mean 1 RMS 2.643 remaining misal. misaligned

u: TEC ∆

end1Clone

Entries 14 Mean -4.605 RMS 11.22

m] µ v [ ∆

  • 100 -80 -60 -40 -20

20 40 60 80 100 #parameters 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

end1Clone

Entries 14 Mean -4.605 RMS 11.22 remaining misal. misaligned

v: TEC ∆

end5Clone

Entries 14 Mean 0.6193 RMS 10.42

rad] µ [ γ ∆

  • 100 -80 -60 -40 -20

20 40 60 80 100 #parameters 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

end5Clone

Entries 14 Mean 0.6193 RMS 10.42 remaining misal. misaligned

: TEC γ ∆

m](end) µ u [ ∆

  • 100 -80
  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 m](start) µ u [ ∆

  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

100 200 300 400 500

vs0_1Clone

Entries 14 Mean x 1 Mean y 2.576 RMS x 2.643 RMS y 66.47

vs0_1Clone

Entries 14 Mean x 1 Mean y 2.576 RMS x 2.643 RMS y 66.47

u: TEC ∆

m](end) µ v [ ∆

  • 100 -80
  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 m](start) µ v [ ∆

  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

100 200 300 400 500

vs1_1Clone

Entries 14 Mean x

  • 4.605

Mean y

  • 33.79

RMS x 11.22 RMS y 81.1

vs1_1Clone

Entries 14 Mean x

  • 4.605

Mean y

  • 33.79

RMS x 11.22 RMS y 81.1

v: TEC ∆

rad](end) µ [ γ ∆

  • 100 -80
  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 rad](start) µ [ γ ∆

  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

100 200 300 400 500

vs5_1Clone

Entries 14 Mean x 0.6193 Mean y

  • 4.459

RMS x 10.42 RMS y 39.52

vs5_1Clone

Entries 14 Mean x 0.6193 Mean y

  • 4.459

RMS x 10.42 RMS y 39.52

: TEC γ ∆

  • Correlation of remaining

and initial misalignment:

slide-5
SLIDE 5

05/05/2009

  • A. Parenti

5

Alignment with BH: TID results

end0Clone

Entries 18 Mean -18.76 RMS 58.52

m] µ u [ ∆

  • 500 -400 -300 -200 -100

100 200 300 400 500 #parameters 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

end0Clone

Entries 18 Mean -18.76 RMS 58.52 remaining misal. misaligned

u: TID ∆

end1Clone

Entries 18 Mean -0.4426 RMS 18.99

m] µ v [ ∆

  • 500 -400 -300 -200 -100

100 200 300 400 500 #parameters 2 4 6 8 10 12

end1Clone

Entries 18 Mean -0.4426 RMS 18.99

remaining misal. misaligned

v: TID ∆

end5Clone

Entries 18 Mean 66.97 RMS 107.4

rad] µ [ γ ∆

  • 500 -400 -300 -200 -100

100 200 300 400 500 #parameters 1 2 3 4 5

end5Clone

Entries 18 Mean 66.97 RMS 107.4 remaining misal. misaligned

: TID γ ∆

m](end) µ u [ ∆

  • 100 -80
  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 m](start) µ u [ ∆

  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

100 200 300 400 500

vs0Clone

Entries 18 Mean x

  • 4.745

Mean y

  • 36.36

RMS x 9.499 RMS y 169.1

vs0Clone

Entries 18 Mean x

  • 4.745

Mean y

  • 36.36

RMS x 9.499 RMS y 169.1

u: TID ∆

m](end) µ v [ ∆

  • 100 -80
  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 m](start) µ v [ ∆

  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

100 200 300 400 500

vs1Clone

Entries 18 Mean x -0.4426 Mean y -42.74 RMS x 18.99 RMS y 132.4

vs1Clone

Entries 18 Mean x -0.4426 Mean y -42.74 RMS x 18.99 RMS y 132.4

v: TID ∆

rad](end) µ [ γ ∆

  • 100 -80
  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 rad](start) µ [ γ ∆

  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

100 200 300 400 500

vs5Clone

Entries 18 Mean x 49.08 Mean y 131.6 RMS x 8.857 RMS y 182.6

vs5Clone

Entries 18 Mean x 49.08 Mean y 131.6 RMS x 8.857 RMS y 182.6

: TID γ ∆

slide-6
SLIDE 6

05/05/2009

  • A. Parenti

6

Alignment with Minimum Bias

  • Based on 20X (CSA08) Monte Carlo
✁

expected similar rate as Beam Halo... using 175k events

  • Track collection: ALCARECOTkAlMinBias
  • Track selection:
✁

ptMin = 1.5

✁

etaMin = -10. / etaMax = +10.

✁

nHitMin = 8 / nHitMin2D = 2

✁

chi2nMax = 50.

✁

minMultiplicity = 1

  • Nb. of selected tracks: ~302200
slide-7
SLIDE 7

05/05/2009

  • A. Parenti

7

Alignment with MB: TEC results

end0Clone

Entries 14 Mean

  • 7.38

RMS 9.596

m] µ u [ ∆

  • 100 -80 -60 -40 -20

20 40 60 80 100 #parameters 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

end0Clone

Entries 14 Mean

  • 7.38

RMS 9.596 remaining misal. misaligned

u: TEC ∆

end1Clone

Entries 14 Mean -6.918 RMS 11

m] µ v [ ∆

  • 100 -80 -60 -40 -20

20 40 60 80 100 #parameters 1 2 3 4 5

end1Clone

Entries 14 Mean -6.918 RMS 11 remaining misal. misaligned

v: TEC ∆

end5Clone

Entries 14 Mean 10.72 RMS 29.63

rad] µ [ γ ∆

  • 100 -80 -60 -40 -20

20 40 60 80 100 #parameters 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

end5Clone

Entries 14 Mean 10.72 RMS 29.63 remaining misal. misaligned

: TEC γ ∆

m](end) µ u [ ∆

  • 100 -80
  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 m](start) µ u [ ∆

  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

100 200 300 400 500

vs0_1Clone

Entries 14 Mean x -7.38 Mean y 2.576 RMS x 9.596 RMS y 66.47

vs0_1Clone

Entries 14 Mean x -7.38 Mean y 2.576 RMS x 9.596 RMS y 66.47

u: TEC ∆

m](end) µ v [ ∆

  • 100 -80
  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 m](start) µ v [ ∆

  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

100 200 300 400 500

vs1_1Clone

Entries 14 Mean x

  • 6.918

Mean y

  • 33.79

RMS x 11 RMS y 81.1

vs1_1Clone

Entries 14 Mean x

  • 6.918

Mean y

  • 33.79

RMS x 11 RMS y 81.1

v: TEC ∆

rad](end) µ [ γ ∆

  • 100 -80
  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 rad](start) µ [ γ ∆

  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

100 200 300 400 500

vs5_1Clone

Entries 14 Mean x 10.72 Mean y -0.9889 RMS x 29.63 RMS y 40.11

vs5_1Clone

Entries 14 Mean x 10.72 Mean y -0.9889 RMS x 29.63 RMS y 40.11

: TEC γ ∆

slide-8
SLIDE 8

05/05/2009

  • A. Parenti

8

Alignment with MB: TID results

end0Clone

Entries 18 Mean -7.264 RMS 12.8

m] µ u [ ∆

  • 500 -400 -300 -200 -100

100 200 300 400 500 #parameters 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

end0Clone

Entries 18 Mean -7.264 RMS 12.8 remaining misal. misaligned

u: TID ∆

end1Clone

Entries 18 Mean -5.711 RMS 12.96

m] µ v [ ∆

  • 500 -400 -300 -200 -100

100 200 300 400 500 #parameters 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

end1Clone

Entries 18 Mean -5.711 RMS 12.96 remaining misal. misaligned

v: TID ∆

end5Clone

Entries 18 Mean 148.2 RMS 141.1

rad] µ [ γ ∆

  • 500 -400 -300 -200 -100

100 200 300 400 500 #parameters 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

end5Clone

Entries 18 Mean 148.2 RMS 141.1 remaining misal. misaligned

: TID γ ∆

m](end) µ u [ ∆

  • 100 -80
  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 m](start) µ u [ ∆

  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

100 200 300 400 500

vs0Clone

Entries 18 Mean x

  • 7.264

Mean y -32.6 RMS x 12.8 RMS y 165.1

vs0Clone

Entries 18 Mean x

  • 7.264

Mean y -32.6 RMS x 12.8 RMS y 165.1

u: TID ∆

m](end) µ v [ ∆

  • 100 -80
  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 m](start) µ v [ ∆

  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

100 200 300 400 500

vs1Clone

Entries 18 Mean x

  • 5.711

Mean y

  • 42.74

RMS x 12.96 RMS y 132.4

vs1Clone

Entries 18 Mean x

  • 5.711

Mean y

  • 42.74

RMS x 12.96 RMS y 132.4

v: TID ∆

rad](end) µ [ γ ∆

  • 100 -80
  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 rad](start) µ [ γ ∆

  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

100 200 300 400 500

vs5Clone

Entries 18 Mean x 66.34 Mean y 153 RMS x 15.63 RMS y 206.5

vs5Clone

Entries 18 Mean x 66.34 Mean y 153 RMS x 15.63 RMS y 206.5

: TID γ ∆

slide-9
SLIDE 9

05/05/2009

  • A. Parenti

9

Alignment with Beam Halo + Minimum Bias

slide-10
SLIDE 10

05/05/2009

  • A. Parenti

10

Alignment with BH+MB: TEC results

end0Clone

Entries 14 Mean 0.8052 RMS 1.969

m] µ u [ ∆

  • 100 -80 -60 -40 -20

20 40 60 80 100 #parameters 1 2 3 4 5

end0Clone

Entries 14 Mean 0.8052 RMS 1.969 remaining misal. misaligned

u: TEC ∆

end1Clone

Entries 14 Mean -4.191 RMS 10.35

m] µ v [ ∆

  • 100 -80 -60 -40 -20

20 40 60 80 100 #parameters 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

end1Clone

Entries 14 Mean -4.191 RMS 10.35 remaining misal. misaligned

v: TEC ∆

end5Clone

Entries 14 Mean 2.114 RMS 3.968

rad] µ [ γ ∆

  • 100 -80 -60 -40 -20

20 40 60 80 100 #parameters 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

end5Clone

Entries 14 Mean 2.114 RMS 3.968 remaining misal. misaligned

: TEC γ ∆

m](end) µ u [ ∆

  • 100 -80
  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 m](start) µ u [ ∆

  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

100 200 300 400 500

vs0Clone

Entries 14 Mean x 0.8052 Mean y 2.576 RMS x 1.969 RMS y 66.47

vs0Clone

Entries 14 Mean x 0.8052 Mean y 2.576 RMS x 1.969 RMS y 66.47

u: TEC ∆

m](end) µ v [ ∆

  • 100 -80
  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 m](start) µ v [ ∆

  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

100 200 300 400 500

vs1Clone

Entries 14 Mean x

  • 4.191

Mean y

  • 33.79

RMS x 10.35 RMS y 81.1

vs1Clone

Entries 14 Mean x

  • 4.191

Mean y

  • 33.79

RMS x 10.35 RMS y 81.1

v: TEC ∆

rad](end) µ [ γ ∆

  • 100 -80
  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 rad](start) µ [ γ ∆

  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

100 200 300 400 500

vs5Clone

Entries 14 Mean x 2.114 Mean y

  • 4.459

RMS x 3.968 RMS y 39.52

vs5Clone

Entries 14 Mean x 2.114 Mean y

  • 4.459

RMS x 3.968 RMS y 39.52

: TEC γ ∆

slide-11
SLIDE 11

05/05/2009

  • A. Parenti

11

Alignment with BH+MB: TID results

end0Clone

Entries 18 Mean -4.692 RMS 7.187

m] µ u [ ∆

  • 500 -400 -300 -200 -100

100 200 300 400 500 #parameters 2 4 6 8 10 12

end0Clone

Entries 18 Mean -4.692 RMS 7.187 remaining misal. misaligned

u: TID ∆

end1Clone

Entries 18 Mean 2.085 RMS 2.334

m] µ v [ ∆

  • 500 -400 -300 -200 -100

100 200 300 400 500 #parameters 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

end1Clone

Entries 18 Mean 2.085 RMS 2.334 remaining misal. misaligned

v: TID ∆

end5Clone

Entries 18 Mean -1.465 RMS 13.41

rad] µ [ γ ∆

  • 500 -400 -300 -200 -100

100 200 300 400 500 #parameters 1 2 3 4 5 6

end5Clone

Entries 18 Mean -1.465 RMS 13.41 remaining misal. misaligned

: TID γ ∆

m](end) µ u [ ∆

  • 100 -80
  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 m](start) µ u [ ∆

  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

100 200 300 400 500

vs0Clone

Entries 18 Mean x

  • 4.692

Mean y -32.6 RMS x 7.187 RMS y 165.1

vs0Clone

Entries 18 Mean x

  • 4.692

Mean y -32.6 RMS x 7.187 RMS y 165.1

u: TID ∆

m](end) µ v [ ∆

  • 100 -80
  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 m](start) µ v [ ∆

  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

100 200 300 400 500

vs1Clone

Entries 18 Mean x 2.085 Mean y

  • 42.74

RMS x 2.334 RMS y 132.4

vs1Clone

Entries 18 Mean x 2.085 Mean y

  • 42.74

RMS x 2.334 RMS y 132.4

v: TID ∆

rad](end) µ [ γ ∆

  • 100 -80
  • 60
  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 rad](start) µ [ γ ∆

  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

100 200 300 400 500

vs5Clone

Entries 18 Mean x 5.765 Mean y 91.36 RMS x 5.341 RMS y 194.4

vs5Clone

Entries 18 Mean x 5.765 Mean y 91.36 RMS x 5.341 RMS y 194.4

: TID γ ∆

slide-12
SLIDE 12

05/05/2009

  • A. Parenti

12

Comparison of the results

Starting 185 185 850

  • 70

70 30 BH only 59 20 107 67 2 11 10 MB only 12 13 141 148 10 11 17 BH+MB 7 2 13

  • 2

10 4 <∆u> TID <∆v> TID <∆γ> TID <γ> TID <∆u> TEC <∆v> TEC <∆γ> TEC

  • For TID BH+MB results are much better than BH and MB
  • nly (especially for angular parameter)
  • For TEC, results are dominated by BH but anyway the

angular parameter benefits from combination with MB

  • Combining BH+MB, there are no more outliers and no shifts

in the mean of parameter residuals