1 / 15

Understanding of the E391a Detector using K L decay

Understanding of the E391a Detector using K L decay. Ken Sakashita ( Osaka University ) for the E391a collaboration. Overview K L → 3 p 0 analysis K L beam & Detector study Conclusion. Overview(1). CsI Charged Veto Collar counter (CC03) Edge counter. Detector only downstream part.

colorado-whitley
Download Presentation

Understanding of the E391a Detector using K L decay

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. Understanding of the E391a Detector using KL decay Ken Sakashita ( Osaka University ) for the E391a collaboration • Overview • KL → 3p0 analysis • KLbeam & Detector study • Conclusion

  2. Overview(1) • CsI • Charged Veto • Collar counter (CC03) • Edge counter Detector only downstream part • Engineering Run • Detector & KL beam understanding • Data sample vs MonteCarlo • KL 3p0 • Confirm our MC simulation • We need confirmed MC simulation in order to study acceptance and so on.

  3. Overview(2) • Data sample (only 3 hours run used in this study) • Mainly KL 3p0 6g • Energy measured by CsI calorimeter • Only neutral decay mode ( no spectrometer !!) • MonteCarlo Simulation • Input KL beam (avr. P = 4GeV@Detector) • GEANT3 based Detector simulation • Method • Reconstructed KL events • Simple clustering (typically 3x3) • Reconstructed KL 3p0 with good vertex chi square • 0.46 < MKL (GeV) < 0.53 Generated by Beam line Simulation KL momentum (GeV/c)

  4. Data MC KL->3p0 Data vs MC • Invariant mass of 6g# of KL Data/MC = 0.74 • Wrong KL momentum distribution Is the problem due to input KL momentum or detector response ? Compare in 0.5 GeV energy bin

  5. Data MC Data MC KL->3p0 Data vs MC( 0.5GeV EKL bin) • Vertex Z distribution • Sensitive to energy response

  6. KL->3p0 Data vs MC( 0.5GeV EKL bin ) Data MC Data MC • Minimum distance between clusters • Sensitive to energy response

  7. Data MC Data MC KL->3p0 Data vs MC( 0.5GeV EKL bin ) • Cluster Hit Position (distance from the center) • Sensitive to detector response

  8. Data MC Reweighted input KL momentum • MCは、よく　detector　を再現しているように見える。 • 実験で得られた KL momentum を、 MC の　input KL momentum に反映させてみる。 • KL momentum is softer than estimated one. • consistent with results of the Beam survey.

  9. Data MC Data MC KL->3p0 Data vs MC( reweighted ) • Vertex Z match well • Cluster Hit position ( Rij ) still match

  10. Data MC KL->3p0 Data vs MC (reweighted) • PT2 distribution is not consistent with MC. • Beam shape D2( ) is not also consistent with MC. MC does not reproduce KL Beam shape well.

  11. Summary • E391a detector is working well. • We can get good KL pencil beam. • Detector & KL beam understanding using KL->3p0 • KL Beam • Yield Data/MC = 0.74 • Momentum distribution • Softer than estmated distribution • It is consistent with the results of the beam survey • After reweighting Data vs MC match well • Beam shape • MC did not reproduce well. It needs more study. • Detector • More detail study in the next step

  12. 予備OHPs

  13. KL->3p0 Data vs MC( reweighted ) • Cluster Hit position ( Rij ) still match • Minimum distance between clusters still match

  14. KL->3p0 Z reconstruction • Make 3 gamma pairs from 6 clusters • Resonstruct Z vertex by asusuming Mp0 from 2g • Calculate vertex chi square for 15 combinations of 3p0 • Select best combination for KL candidate

  15. Data MC KL->3p0 Data vs MC( reweighted ) • Beam shape ( vertex X,Y )

More Related