csc detector
play

CSC Detector Woochun Park @USC ATLAS Meeting Jan 3, 2007 Cathode - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

CSC Detector Woochun Park @USC ATLAS Meeting Jan 3, 2007 Cathode Strip Chambers MDT are well suited in barrel region with economically produced chambers for the 5500m 2 area. But, large diameter and high operating pressure make them


  1. CSC Detector Woochun Park @USC ATLAS Meeting Jan 3, 2007

  2. Cathode Strip Chambers • MDT are well suited in barrel region with economically produced chambers for the 5500m 2 area. • But, large diameter and high operating pressure make them unsuitable in areas where high counting rates are expected (>200Hz/cm 2 ). • In |h| > 2.0, CSC detectors are used. – It provides the required spatial resolution of 80mm. In several prototypes, a sigma <= 60 mm has been measured. – Electron drift time less than 30ns resulting an r.m.s timing resolution of 7ns. By detecting the earlist arrival from four layers, r.m.s. resolutions of 3.5ns have been measured. – Low neutron sensitivity: because of the small gas volume and the absence of hydrogen in the operating gas (Ar/CO 2 /CF 4 mixture), the measured sensitivity is less than 10 -4 . • Details are muon TDR. http://atlasinfo.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/MUON/TDR/pdf_final/CSC. pdf

  3. CSC Reconstruction Methods • Center of Gravity – This method uses the three amplitudes of the cluster to compute the centroid of the charge distribution. – Currently, it’s adopted in Moore package by David Adams. • Parabola Interpolation – This method draws a parabola through the three amplitudes and uses the position of its maximum to calculate the hit position. • Cluster Fit – This reconstruction method uses a 2-dimensional fit to the time samples of the center strip and its 2 neighbors on each side.

  4. CSC Cluster Performance • The code is written and run in athena framework. • 12.0.3 codes are checked out. • atlas-dc3- 07.007233.digit_newtags.muminus_pt100GeV._00001.pool.root MC (20k) are used (in castor [CERN Advanced STORage System]) – DetDescrVersion = “ATLAS-DC3-07” should be used. – If not, ntuple doesn’t save any information. • CscSimPosValidatorOptions.py makes csc_simpos.root which contains generator level hit information. • CscClusterValidationOptions.py makes csc_clusters.root which contains detector simulated cluster information (So, correct DetDescrVersion should be crucial). • Then, run csc_cluster_performace.exe with two root files. It makes csc_perf.root which provides figures in the following pages. • Currently, job is run in lxplus.cern.ch. Their batch queue commands are same as BaBar’s (bsub, bjobs, klog,etc).

  5. Cluster calibration: Qright/Qpeak vs. Qleft/Qpeak r-strips • Looks fine. CSS CSL phi-strips

  6. • It’s saved in table and get a strip position by a quadratic interpolation. • Currently, it is used as it has in the code. • This can be generated by real data. • One could use his own table as below in jobOption.py file. # V02 MC QRAT calibration with nbin=50 and nrms= 2 CscThresholdClusterBuilder.qratmin_css_r = 0.0936681 CscThresholdClusterBuilder.qratcor_css_r = [ 0.000000, 0.000000, 0.000000, 0.000000, 0.0807402, 0.192581, 0.2788, 0.349086, 0.409295, 0.454935, 0.495891, 0.53068, 0.55803, 0.579625, 0.605338, 0.625196, 0.647682, 0.66527, 0.682893, 0.700273, 0.71683, 0.731681, 0.745759, 0.759357, 0.774508, 0.787322, 0.800335, 0.808468, 0.822776, 0.832892, 0.844826, 0.854548, 0.86595, 0.875246, 0.884159, 0.893254, 0.902383, 0.910208, 0.919269, 0.928248, 0.936756, 0.943576, 0.94925, 0.957871, 0.96772, 0.973168, 0.980292, 0.988297, 0.99183, 1.000000] # V02 MC QRAT calibration with nbin=50 and nrms= 2 CscThresholdClusterBuilder.qratmin_csl_r = 0.107754 CscThresholdClusterBuilder.qratcor_csl_r = [ 0.000000, 0.000000, 0.000000, 0.000000, 0.0398906, 0.0935101, 0.1996, 0.276374, 0.34136, 0.397006, 0.442904, 0.485013, 0.519259, 0.546959, 0.571139, 0.595666, 0.615712, 0.636289, 0.657206, 0.674757, 0.69259, 0.708839, 0.723793, 0.740804, 0.754768, 0.768269, 0.782545, 0.796264, 0.807948, 0.820126, 0.829775, 0.841212, 0.851852, 0.862724, 0.875594, 0.883446, 0.894059, 0.902656, 0.913039, 0.920321, 0.930196, 0.938684, 0.946356, 0.955538, 0.962261, 0.968984, 0.980072, 0.98636, 0.992682, 1.000000]

  7. • Generator level hit information and cluster position in Clustering reconstruction are saved separately. Performace • Resolution is defined as the difference of two. The definition is a little different from residual. • The following figures are identical to Davids. – 10k single muminus in castor. Same MC to David’s. For muplus, it’s similar result as muminus. – In CscClusterization-00-10-20 rPull Sigma was:: 0.80 (vs 1.01) – Error of z position (dzc) may be updated in CscClusterization-00-10-21 ?? – No change observed in CscClusterization-00-10-22. RMS = 61 µ m σ = 47 µ m

  8. Segment Performace (I) • The following figures are very close to David’s. – 10k single muminus in castor. Same MC to David’s. CscClusterization-00-10-22 is used rather than 00-10-21. • There are four parameters (r, r angle, phi, phi angle). – Either 2 X 2D segment or 4D segment algorithm available. r RMS = 31 µ m σ = 26 µ m Close to 47/sqrt(4)

  9. Segment Performace (II) • The following figures are very close to David’s. – 10k single muminus in castor. Same MC to David’s. CscClusterization-00-10-22 is used rather than 00-10-21. • There are four parameters (r, r angle, phi, phi angle). – Either 2 X 2D segment or 4D segment algorithm available. φ RMS = 5.3 mm σ = 2.9 mm Different from 3.4/sqrt(4). Errors are correlated??

  10. Segment Performance: Spoiled cluster multiplicity • There is correlation between real/fake muon and number of spoiled clusters. Real muon fake muon

  11. In Real Data • The latest beam test data were taken from the CSC’s: – CERN (August 2004): x5 beam test – H8 (September 2004) – H8 (October 2004) • For x5 beam test data, it’s located at /castor/cern.ch/user/s/schernau/x5 with .csc format. • Castor :: CERN Advanced STORage System • These are readable by sitView software (MS Window based).

  12. Resolution from Test Beam Data • They used three-point residual to estimate resolution. – The prediction is based on a straight line between layers 1 and 3, evaluated at layer 2. – x predicted = 0.5 (x 1 + x 3 ). – Therefore, the residual is given by r = x 2 – 0.5 (x 1 + x 3 ). – Error analysis relates the error in the residual to the error in the position measurement. – Assuming that each layer has the same resolution σ x , then the error in the residual is σ r = sqrt(3/2) σ x

  13. • Different reconstruction method would result in different resolution.

  14. • Higher counting rate will degrade CSC detector performance. • > 200Hz/cm 2 nominally expected in ATLAS.

  15. • Cosmic ray data taking with 5 Toroid field on using Sector 13 4 6 3 7 in November 18-19 2006. 2 8 • Data will be taken for CSC detectors soon. 1 9 10 16 15 11 14 12 13

  16. Possible Contribution • Data is usually saved in ByteStream format (binary file). Athena framework needs RDO format. BS should be converted to RDO when we analyze it in athena framework. – Unmanned and urgent (Vinnie’s comment). – To make a comparison b/w data and MC in athena framework, it’s essential. • Strengthen effort in CSC detector study. – Work together with David Adams (BNL). – Crucial code is already written in framework. – Currently, it’s validated only in single Muon MC sample. – Algorithm is much needed to be improved in battle environment such as charge correlation b/w x and y strips and timing information. – Israeli group (Tel Aviv Univ) are developing CSC algorithm for muonboy. They use HoughTransform algorithm.

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend