1 / 7

CAL DQM: HOLES and REMC BAD CHANNELS

CAL DQM: HOLES and REMC BAD CHANNELS. T. Sch örner-Sadenius Hamburg University PYCOOR Meeting, 18 January 2005. HA cell 2. HA cell 1. EM cells 1-4 (5*20 cm 2 ). INTRODUCTION CAL, bad channels and holes. Each cell read out on two sides (a cell has two channels).

aelwen
Download Presentation

CAL DQM: HOLES and REMC BAD CHANNELS

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CAL DQM: HOLES and REMC BAD CHANNELS T. Schörner-Sadenius Hamburg University PYCOOR Meeting, 18 January 2005

  2. HA cell 2 HA cell 1 EM cells 1-4(5*20 cm2) INTRODUCTIONCAL, bad channels and holes Each cell read out on two sides (a cell has two channels). One side bad: a bad channel – basically uncritical. Two sides bad: a hole – ZEUS has become a bit blind – critical. In case of RCAL EMC cells close to the beam pipe: bad channels considered bad – angular (Q2) resolution gets worse (both channels used to learn about position of signal).

  3. IS THERE A PROBLEM? Or: How are things done? Question: How are CAL holes taken into account in NC/PHP and CC analyses?-- efficiencies?-- background estimates? Problem: Holes may lead to fake CC events and to NC background events. For NC analyses, efficiency decreases. Question of low Q2 analyses (REMC beam pipe channels)? Aim: Improving our CAL DQM and adapting it to the needs of the physics analyses. Cause: Recent periods with -- many holes (R18, F16, up to 9 holes for some – few – running periods)-- up to 4 REMC beam pipe bad channels

  4. RECENT PROBLEMATIC PERIODSand some history for comparison 52244 – 52276: 4-6 holes in R18 (270k events) 52258 – 52288: 4 REMC bad channels in R18 (450k events) 52695 – 52712: 5 holes in F16 (320k events) … always plus other bad channels and holes …

  5. DQM NOW AND YESTERDAYSome history for comparison 1: good2: bad cells3: RCAL bpipe4: fix offline5: cannot be used6: crate errors7: neighbouring cells8: bad timing Strategy so far: -- give 5 if kinematics bad (distributions, single cells) (mask single hot cells and take???) -- give 5 (6,8) if HV off, timing bad, crate problems -- REMC channels basically accepted -- many holes  mostly taken Does that make sense?

  6. EXISTING CODE all by N. Brummer. Most seems historic to me … Mcholes.fpp: Routine can kill cells in MC to describe the occurrence of holes in data. The procedure is weighted according to the lumi of the run range in question. Calbadlist.fpp: contains list of bad channels and holes, updated for each new run and event (static/dynamic holes). <=1993: ???? 1994/95: implemented and used >=1996: ??? Calbadpm.fpp: checks if given PM is bad

  7. WHAT TO DO? Are these things used somehow? Should they? What can the CAL group do in order to aid the analyses? Mcholes update for all years? Quite a bit of tedious work, but more or less straight forward. But can only be done properly once all lumis are there. Check usage and functionality of calbadlist and calbadpm Call them before CC MC reconstruction? Effect of REMC bad channels? Reject runs with (many) holes? When to start? Take into account geometry? How?

More Related