1 / 15

ECAL Studies

ECAL Studies. Jacopo Nardulli. Why the ECAL is as it is ?. The LOI ILD Ecal structuring comes from an old optimization from H. Videau available here ECAL Optimization from H. Videau He considers a few scenarios with different nr of layers and different absorber thickness

daria-fleming
Download Presentation

ECAL Studies

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. ECAL Studies Jacopo Nardulli

  2. Why the ECAL is as it is ? • The LOI ILD Ecal structuring comes from an old optimization from H. Videau available here ECAL Optimization from H. Videau • He considers a few scenarios with different nr of layers and different absorber thickness • Similar studies have now also been done by a LLR PhD student M.S.Amjad and have been presented at the CALICE Meeting in Casablanca

  3. Two possible studies • Keep same radiation length: ECAL with less layers • Less expensive, energy resolution can be worse, as the pattern recognition • Varying nr of layers and absorber thickness, not the Si thickness • Change the radiation length: ECAL with less layers • Less expensive, overall performance changes • If I change the X0, can have more leakage into the HCAL which could be fixed with a combined ECAL/HCAL analysis • Varying nr of layers, absorber thickness and studying performance as a function of the X0 similar to what Angela has done for HCAL.

  4. Now only first study: Different ECAL models • Altering the number of layers and their absorber thickness in such a way that Total Absorber thickness in the detector remains the same. • The analyses included in this talk were done with Single Photon with θ and φ varying in the full range and Energies of 1, 10, 100 and 500 GeV • Default model 20 layers in 1st stack and 9 layers in 2nd stack

  5. Disclaimers • Here showing the Energy Resolution vs. the Energy but to get the energy resolution I am not using the official MarlinProcessor which does that –rms90 and mean90- but single Gaussian fits. • So do not look at absolute numbers, but at the general trend of the plots • THIS IS WORK IN PROGRESS: Not all plots are fully understood

  6. Results: changing nr layers in 1st stack Energy Res. vs Input Energy • Energy resolution degrades for low energy • We fail to get all the energy and the mean is much lower than the input Energy •  Need to use different calibration constants 278 55 5.5 Mean Rec. Energy vs Input Energy

  7. Results: changing nr layers in 2nd stack Energy Res. vs Input Energy • Energy resolution degrades, while we have lower degradation in the rec. of all the energy in the event • Changing 2nd stack affects high energy photons which deposit more energy 420 89 9.5 Mean Rec. Energy vs Input Energy

  8. Results: changing nr layers in 1st and 2nd stack Energy Res. vs Input Energy 360 81 8.6 Mean Rec. Energy vs Input Energy

  9. Spares • All same plots in barrel and forward region

  10. Barrel Results: changing nr layers in 1st stack

  11. Barrel Results: changing nr layers in 2nd stack

  12. Barrel Results: nr layers in 1st and 2nd stack

  13. Forward Results: changing nr layers in 1st stack

  14. Forward Results: changing nr layers in 2nd stack

  15. Forward Results: nr layers in 1st and 2nd stack

More Related