Decay Electron Reconstruction Results and Other Studies For the - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
decay electron reconstruction results and other studies
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Decay Electron Reconstruction Results and Other Studies For the - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Feb 02, 2023 37 likes •229 views

Decay Electron Reconstruction Results and Other Studies For the E-Scale Working Group Joshua Albert March 9/10, 2009 + vs. - in MC Used data in CONVVECT bank to see what parent and decay particles were in MC. (-/+)11 = e +/-

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Decay Electron Reconstruction Results and Other Studies

For the E-Scale Working Group Joshua Albert March 9/10, 2009

slide-2
SLIDE 2

µ+ vs. µ- in MC

  • Used data in CONVVECT bank to see

what parent and decay particles were in MC.

  • (-/+)11 = e+/-
  • (-/+)13 = µ+/-
  • 22 = photon
  • 0 = failure
  • The following totals are for all MC events...
slide-3
SLIDE 3

µ+ vs. µ- in MC

  • (µ+→e+)/(µ-→e-) = 1.667
  • (µ+→e+)/(µ-→e- & µ-→γ) = 1.44
  • (µ+→e+)/(µ-→e- & µ-→γ && failure) = 1.32

MC Count Decay Type n % µ+→e+ 15730912 56.9% µ-→e- 9438713 34.2% µ-→γ 1458591 5.3% failure 1004858 3.6% Total: 27633184 100.0%

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Data vs. MC with apnmue/apmuetype cut

data apmuetype(1) For run numbers: 621XX No Cuts apnmue failure 2 gate 3 byebye Total 33861 40.9% 15926 19.2% 0.0% 49787 60.1% 1 0.0% 30163 36.4% 2135 2.6% 32298 39.0% 2 0.0% 619 0.75% 59 0.07% 678 0.82% 3 0.0% 14 0.02% 0.00% 14 0.02% Total: 33861 40.9% 46722 56.4% 2194 2.7% 82777 100.0% MC apmuetype(1) For run numbers: 621XX No Cuts apnmue failure 2 gate 3 byebye Total 49290 59.5% 8719 10.5% 0.0% 58009 66.1% 1 0.0% 27913 33.7% 1490 1.8% 29403 33.5% 2 0.0% 291 0.35% 51 0.06% 342 0.4% 3 0.0% 0.00% 0.00% 0.0% Total: 49290 59.5% 36923 44.6% 1541 1.9% 87754 100.0%

39.0%/33.5% = 1.16 There may be a bug in my pulling values out, since there does not appear to be a correlation between #data & #MC events for a given run, which was previously

  • confirmed. I will investigate tonight.
slide-5
SLIDE 5

Sample Makeup

  • The sample used for this is made up of data and

MC events for SK-IV which are identified as stopping muons. Then apply:

  • pass stmufit goodness (bgood != -1)
  • one probable decay electron found
  • decay electron type = gate
  • only use runs where both the data and MC run

correctly

  • Plots have: 40695 MC events

48890 Data events

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Selection Cuts

  • The following cuts were used, attempting

to duplicate Ishihara-san’s cuts:

  • 2µs<t<8µs
  • n50 (# hits in 50 µs time window)>60
  • egood (e recon goodness)>0.5
  • Electron reconstructed vertex in FV
slide-7
SLIDE 7

Plots to Check Validity

  • I have changed color schemes to match

Mine-san.

  • Red = Data
  • Blue = MC
  • Green = MC truth information
  • The e+ vs. e- plot is the exception.
slide-8
SLIDE 8

x (cm) −1500 −1000 −500 500 1000 1500 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

decay e vertex x

y (cm) −1500 −1000 −500 500 1000 1500 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

decay e vertex y

z (cm) −1500 −1000 −500 500 1000 1500 200 400 600 800 1000

decay e vertex z

Not good agreement Data MC True

slide-9
SLIDE 9

dist (cm) 50 100 150 200 250 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500

electron vertex recon distance

True vector position - reconstructed MC position

slide-10
SLIDE 10

x (cm) −1 −0.8 −0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

decay e direction x

y (cm) −1 −0.8 −0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

decay e direction y

z (cm) −1 −0.8 −0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

decay e direction z

Data MC True

slide-11
SLIDE 11

s) µ t ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2

10

3

10

Time to decay

Decay Time Fits: MC True: 2.068µs MC Recon: 2.071µs Data: 2.063µs Data MC True

slide-12
SLIDE 12

s) µ t ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2

10

3

10

Time to decay

Electron Positron Decay Time Fits: Positron: 2.203µs Electron: 1.832µs

slide-13
SLIDE 13

n 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800

n50

Data peaks at lower n50 Data MC

slide-14
SLIDE 14

n 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

s) µ n50 (2−4

n 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

s) µ n50 (4−6

n 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

s) µ n50 (6−8

Number of hits in 50 µs time window

2-4 µs 4-6 µs 6-8 µs Data MC

slide-15
SLIDE 15

s) µ t ( −0.5 −0.4 −0.3 −0.2 −0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 200 400 600 800 1000

Recon−True Decay Time

May be two peaks: 0 ns and -100ns ?

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Momentum (MeV/c) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Reconstructed Momentum of Decay Electron

Mean amome: True:38.175 MeV MC: 38.804 MeV Data: 38.841 MeV Data MC True

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Momentum (MeV/c) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

s) µ Reconstructed Momentum of Electron (2−4

Momentum (MeV/c) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 100 200 300 400 500

s) µ Reconstructed Momentum of Electron (4−6

Momentum (MeV/c) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

s) µ Reconstructed Momentum of Electron (6−8

Electron Momentum

2-4 µs 4-6 µs 6-8 µs Data MC

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Quantitative results

  • Mean reconstructed e-momentum and hits

in 50µs time window as a function of decay time:

2-4µs 4-6µs 6-8µs amome MC 38.8 MeV 38.7 MeV 38.9 MeV amome data 38.9 MeV 38.7 MeV 38.8 MeV n50 MC 224.0 224.4 225.2 n50 data 219.7 219.7 220.2

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Conclusions

  • Amome mean for Data/MC is accurate to

0.1%, but the fit seems a bit off.

  • Reason why z-distribution isn’t accurate is

not known

  • Decay time does not seem to appreciably

affect other parameters

  • Data and MC have different numbers of

decay electron candidates, something may be wrong with my analysis