1 / 29

Shootout experiment GSFMA315 at a glance

This detailed report provides an overview of the GSFMA315 experiment, focusing on large-scale high-energy physics measurements and analysis conducted with innovative methods. The report offers insights into inverse kinematics, large detector setups, and the normalization process, highlighting key findings and recommendations for further investigations. Participants and collaborators involved in the experiment are also listed.

bvillalobos
Download Presentation

Shootout experiment GSFMA315 at a glance

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. Shootout experiment GSFMA315 at a glance Inverse kinematics Large v/c ~8.5% 12C(84Kr[394MeV],4n)92Mo 4:Sa 1:Mo,Tu GS GT 2:Tu,We,Th 3:Th,Fr 122Sn(40Ar[170MeV],4n)158Er High multiplicity Normal kinematics v/c=2.2% 4/21-26/2014

  2. First look 92Mo case, just ‘quality’Normalize on the high energy tail Tracked GT Spectra FOM<0.8 Look closer

  3. 92Mo case: energy resolution in GT is much better at 2 MeV GS sort using side channels Simple GS root sort FWHM in GT at 2 MeV is ~7.8 keV Double gated spectra (GT not full statistics)

  4. 92Mo case in GT: tracked, CCsum using mode 2 information and CCsum using just center of crystal position

  5. GT resolution for the 2065 keV line in 92Mo GT FWHM 8.7 keV or 0.42%

  6. Participants (>40) ayangeakaa@anl.gov, cmcampbell@lbl.gov, hlcrawford@lbl.gov, Mcromaz@lbl.gov, hdavid@anl.gov, iylee@lbl.gov, mriley@phy.fsu.edu, dgs@wustl.edu, weisshaa@nscl.msu.edu, Alain.Astier@csnsm.in2p3.fr, clement@ganil.fr, francois.didierjean@iphc.cnrs.fr, gilbert.duchene@iphc.cnrs.fr, n.redon@ipnl.in2p3.fr, stezow@ipnl.in2p3.fr, radforddc@ornl.gov, EdanaKarina_MerchanRodriguez@uml.edu, awiens@lbl.gov, VikramSingh_Prasher@student.uml.edu, anna.wilson@stir.ac.uk harkjess@umd.edu (PI)torben@anl.gov, mcarpenter@phy.anl.gov, pfallon@lbl.gov, janssens@anl.gov, khoo@phy.anl.gov, kondev@anl.gov, (PI)korichi@csnsm.in2p3.fr, aomacchiavelli@lbl.gov, seweryniak@anl.gov, zhu@anl.gov, Partha_Chowdhury@uml.edu, kay@anl.gov, chiara@phy.anl.gov, crhoffman@phy.anl.gov, greene@anl.gov, cbeausan@richmond.edu, lriley@ursinus.edu, malbers@phy.anl.gov,

  7. EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA.....

  8. Using60Cosource dataafterrun Preliminary!! (normalization problems)

  9. Normalize to 1 hour of beam time;158Er case, ‘standard setup’ for 93 GS detectors 28 GT crystals GS coverage ~80% GT coverage ~22% GS norm needs to be redone

  10. Normalize to 1 hour of beam time;92Mo case, ‘standard setup’ for 93 GS detectors 28 GT crystals GS coverage ~80% GT coverage ~22% Not resolved GS norm needs to be redone

  11. Re-normalize GT to have the same coverage as GS (~80%) from its current coverage of ~22%This scaling is not proper as more GT modulesmakes the tracking (much) better Gretina spectra are lower limits

  12. Normalize to the currents 84Kr beam charge state is 19+ 40Ar beam charge state is 9+ GT, 92Mo, run 75, 0.1 pna GS, 92Mo, run 21 _000, 15-16 ena/19 = 0.8 pna (X8 faster) GT, 158Er, run 148, 5 ena/9 = 0.55 pna GS, 158Er, run 22 _000, 25ena/9 = 2.7pna (X4.9 faster) :: The DAQ limits the current we can handle in GT

  13. If we just scaled to the beam current GS can handle then we would see :: With a faster DAQ, GT could compete with GS with only 22% coverage vs the GS coverage of 80%

  14. Sum of gates in GS and GT for 158Er, normalized to high energy tail. Single interactions are included in the tracking, FOM<0.8

  15. Peak to background issues158Er case: Find the background spectrum (blue) for the sum ofgated spectra for GS and GT GT sum of gates spectrum

  16. Then produce sum of gates divided by the smooth background == “apeak/background” measure GRETINA Single fit per segment decomp GRETINA GRETINA Standard decomp GAMMASPHERE Gammasphere

  17. Still having problems with the decomposition: Check the ‘radius’ spectrum. 60Co data taken at MSU (blue) and ANL after the shootout run (red). The ANL spectrum looks better, the new basis puts more points between boundaries and less localized points near boundaries Same decomp function! But new basis at ANL ANL MSU New basis is better!!

  18. We have the option to replay the mode3 data we took!Re-decomposed158Er data, FOM<0.8red=oldblue=new We restrict decomposition fits to only have one interaction per segment Slightly better; but the FOM distribution can be different so...

  19. Re-decomposed 158Er data, FOM spectrumNon trivial FOM seems to improve a little!but counts in 0 (single hits) are also different (4.3x10^7 vs 1.1x10^7) Old New Max at 3.1 Max at 0.27

  20. ‘Radius plot’, for all interaction points. (this is a plot of the distance from the target for all interaction points the decomposition found) Old New New spike What is actually better?

  21. Radius spectrum for first interaction points according to tracking program new old

  22. Gamma ray multiplicity distributions Old New

  23. The fifth leg: the 166Ho source Lew Riley added stationary source to UCGRETINA! Need 18 levels to simulate We can compare some real data to the GEANT4 simulated data that we took a few months ago We only had 6 detectors at that time, and there was no target chamber We send real data and GEANT4 simulated data through the same tracking; the G4 data after realistic packing of interaction points and smearing of positions and energy Preliminary analysis:

  24. Higher energies The continuum is really well reproduced! Does this mean that there is a future for continuum spectroscopy using GT or AGATA?

  25. Low energy region, ICC added to G4 spectra by hand The 184 keV is much better; but the 81 keV line Is cut by some thresholds in GT.The extra lines in the G4 spectrum gets stronger at low energies for some reason

  26. First look at 158Er, just ‘quality’::normalize on the high energy tail Tracked GT Spectra FOM<0.8

  27. Shootout experiment; gsfma315 4/21-26/2014 The PROPOSAL was: We propose to firmly establish the performance of the decomposition and gamma--ray tracking algorithms by comparing the GRETINA to the Gammasphere gamma--ray detector array, under the same conditions, using the following two reactions The two reactions are complementary. Indeed, the first reaction will allow us to extract the performance of the decomposition and tracking algorithms at high gamma--ray multiplicity at a moderate recoil velocity. The second reaction will allow us to evaluate the Doppler reconstruction capability, based on tracking, in the case of high recoil velocities, but at a moderate multiplicity of gamma rays. The experimental results will be compared to GEANT4 Monte Carlo simulations. 122Sn(40Ar[170MeV],4n)158Er 12C(84Kr[394MeV],4n)92Mo

  28. GT resolution for the 2065 keV line in 92Mo

More Related