1 / 38

Status of MEG Software

Status of MEG Software. Fabrizio Cei INFN and University of Pisa INFN Scientific Commission I Rome, 06 February 2007. Outline. MEG Software organization Status of Monte Carlo simulation Short remind of analysis framework Status of analysis codes

hank
Download Presentation

Status of MEG Software

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. Status of MEG Software Fabrizio Cei INFN and University of Pisa INFN Scientific Commission I Rome, 06 February 2007 Fabrizio Cei

  2. Outline • MEG Software organization • Status of Monte Carlo simulation • Short remind of analysis framework • Status of analysis codes • Status of MEG computing power@PSI • Preliminary analysis of 2006 beam test Fabrizio Cei

  3. ROOT ZEBRA MIDAS ROOT MEG Software Organization Simulation WFM and pile-up simulation Bartender (ROME) MC Analyzer (ROME) Real Data DAQ Fabrizio Cei

  4. Status of Monte Carlo MEGMC program - written in Geant3.21; - data output in ZEBRA banks, automatically converted to C++ structures (readable from analysis codes); - it simulates pair (e.g. meg) or single (e.g. Michel positrons) events; - full simulation of the detector: DCH, TICP, TICZ, LXe, Target, Beam, Magnet and magnetic field, mechanical supports, Beam Upstream and Downstream elements, calibration devices (NaI, proton accelerator tube & targets, LH2 target, a sources …); - LXe & TC beam tests simulated by specific modules (tbeam & tbtc); - different running configurations (final or run 2006); - large samples(~ 105) of events generated without difficulties; - few event types missing, e.g. LED Completion Status:99 % Fabrizio Cei

  5. Examples of MC events meg event Michel positron RUN 2006 configuration: No LXe, no TICZ, 8 DCH, TICP displaced by ± 12 cm Fabrizio Cei

  6. MC Man Power All persons @ 10  50 % of their time: • Coordination: S. Yamada (UCI), F. Cei (Pisa); • SVN repository: S. Yamada, P. Cattaneo (Pavia); • Event generation:F. Cei, S. Yamada, Y. Hisamatsu (Tokyo); • LXe: S. Yamada, F. Cei, G. Signorelli (Pisa); • TICP/TICZ: P. Cattaneo,Y. Uchiyama (Tokyo); • DCH: H. Nishiguchi (Tokyo), M. Hillebrandt (PSI); • Beam & Magnet: W. Ootani (Tokyo); • Target: V. Tumakov (UCI); • NaI: Y.Nishimura (Tokyo); • Calibrations: F. Cei Fabrizio Cei

  7. Software framework: ROME ROME (Root basedObjectOrientedMidasEnvironment) is a framework generator; ROME is separated in one detector independent and one detector dependent part. It has been adopted by other experiments; It uses only 6 different C++ objects; ROME makes the “dirty job”: creating the structure, defining C++ classes, writing many include files, creating the dependences and the hierarchy …; the users and detector experts perform the “smart job”: writing the analysis methods (tasks) and the related folders (data stored on memory) and trees (stored on disks); the most important feature is the modularity: the tasks can be exchanged at runtime. Main developer: M. Schneebeli (PSI) Fabrizio Cei

  8. Histograms Histograms Histograms Histograms Histograms Histograms Histograms Histograms Histograms Tasks Tasks Tasks Trees Trees Trees ROME Interconnections Disk (Input) Read (Format: ZEBRA, MIDAS & ROOT) Read Fill Folders Fill Fill Flag Fill Disk (Output) Write (ROOT) Fabrizio Cei

  9. ROME Event Display (ARGUS) Display includes tracks and energy deposits Fabrizio Cei

  10. Waveform/track display Liquid Xenon Drift Chamber Both used in on-line and analysis too Fabrizio Cei

  11. Status of analysis codes 1) MEGBartender • Event mixing tested; multiple formats allowed (MIDAS, ROOT, ZEBRA); • Waveform simulation completed for LXe, TICP/TICZ, DCH wires; work needed for pad simulation; • Preliminary trigger simulation included; Completion status: not far from end Fabrizio Cei

  12. Status of analysis codes 2) MEGAnalyzer • LXe: (R. Sawada (Tokyo), G. Signorelli, Y. Uchiyama, S. Yamada, F. Cei) -Waveform decoding implemented; • Charge-based reconstruction algorithms implemented; most of them tested; • Timing reconstruction & calibration algorithms under implementation and testing; • Peak finding and pattern recognition tasks existing; • Completion status: ~ 90 % Fabrizio Cei

  13. Status of analysis codes 3) • TICP/Z (P. Cattaneo, Y. Uchiyama, D. Zanello (Rome) F. Xiao (UCI), A. Barchiesi (Rome), S. Dussoni (Genova)) -Waveform analysis implemented (baseline, pulses, charges, left/right timing, pile-up flags …); - Preliminary hit reconstruction implemented (Q,tL,tR)  (z,<t>); - TBD: correlation between adjacent bars, correlation with DCH Completion status:~ 75 %, but sufficient man power Fabrizio Cei

  14. Status of analysis codes 4) • DCH (H. Nishiguchi, M. Schneebeli, M. Hildebrandt) - 3D-map of magnetic field; - tracking by (preliminary) Kalman filter implemented; - waveform decoding existing, but slow; - hit extraction (x,t  3D coordinates) still missing; - extraction of z-coordinate from cathode pad information still missing. Since the DCH software seems the most critical part, (sometasks missing, reduced man power) we decided to put some effort on this. Fabrizio Cei

  15. Status of analysis codes 5) • Trigger (G. Signorelli, D. Nicolò (Pisa)) - Trigger info/banks coded in MIDAS:run #, event #, trigger code, trigger WFMs, scalers(useful for determining run/live time); - Charge and timing reconstruction algorithms implemented and under testing (see later) • Database (R. Sawada) - Two databases:MySQL and sqlite3; easy conversion. - MySQL needs network; sqlite3 for stand-alone environment in a separate svn module (megdb). - Included:geometry, trigger/hardware configuration, run table, physical constants, reconstruction coefficients … Completion status:~ OK Fabrizio Cei

  16. MEG computing @PSI Offline cluster for MEG • Presently available : 20 CPU cores + 30 TB diskFinal situation : 64 CPU cores + 100 TB disk in total • Easily extensible • GBit link to online cluster requested 15 x 500 GB SATA Sun Fire x4100 quad core 4 GB Sun Fire x4100 quad core 4 GB Fiber Channel Switch Sun Fire x4100 quad core 4 GB GBit Ethernet Sun Fire x4100 quad core 4 GB Sun Fire x4100 quad core 4 GB Fabrizio Cei

  17. Preliminary analysis of 2006 run Hardware configuration: - no LXe; no TICZ; 8/16 DCH installed; - TICP shifted by ± 12 cm for mechanical compatibility; - Both detectors equipped with trigger and read-out electronics (Domino sampling chip); - trigger by single TICP Bar  DCH events seen as “accidentals” in time MC Simulation: - 500000 Michel positrons with isotropic angular distribution and “RUN2006” configuration Fabrizio Cei

  18. Run 2006 configuration Only 3 DCH effectively working; one broken wire in one of these. No couples of adjacent chambers working  no tracks. Six TICP bars always off (four of them equipped with test electronics); two others off in some runs US DS Fabrizio Cei

  19. Pulse finding algorithm • Designed to be fast (no fit, ~ 8 kWFM/s) and versatile; • Smooth the waveform to reduce noise; • Find reasonable baseline. Fabrizio Cei

  20. Search for pulse • Bool_t inPulse + FindPulseStart() and FindPulseEnd(); • Pulse Merge / Pulse Cleanup (remove too small pulses). Fabrizio Cei

  21. Application to DCH 1) DRS Data (500 MHz) DCH waveform example Wire signals Cathode signals Cathodesnot yet used Time correlation with the trigger signal Low Rate High Rate Fabrizio Cei

  22. Application to DCH 2) • Events selected by wire-end • coincidences • Cuts on MC events by comparing expected/measured charge distributions (~ 30 % uncertainty) • Reasonable agreement with MC predictions Slightly lower rate on Plane B (outmost) Plane A Plane B Black Data Red MC A COBRA center B Fabrizio Cei

  23. Application to DCH: 2D-map • In the MC we have the hit z-coordinate, for data we use asymmetries • A “shadow” is present on the upstream side Fabrizio Cei

  24. Application to TICP 1) Amplitude vs Charge relation Trigger threshold: 50 mV in amplitude for both channels && 200 mV on sum. Amplitude vs charge relation fitted for determining an equivalent charge threshold and simulate the trigger threshold for MC events. DRS amplitude attenuated by a factor five Fabrizio Cei

  25. Application to TICP 2) Charge distributions Bar 6, run 154 Red Data Black MC (scaled to superimpose peaks) All bars together. Individual calibrations to be improved Bar 11, run 154 MC events selected by cuts on charge distribution to schematize trigger selections (25% uncertainty) Fabrizio Cei

  26. Application to TICP 3) Number of hit bar per event Red Data Black MC Run 154 Low Intensity Run 236 High Intensity Fabrizio Cei

  27. Number of hits on each bar Run 236 High Intensity Red Data Black MC Down stream Up stream Down stream Up stream Run 154 Low Intensity Fabrizio Cei

  28. DCH and TICP rates Expected rates computed by using the nominal opening of beam slits. Measured rates computed by using MC evaluated efficiencies: eDCH (single dch) 6.6 % eTICP  4.2 % Estimated uncertainties on trigger rates  20  30 %: - limited statistics; - MC cuts mRate (x 107m/s) 16% 65% 88% 100% Fabrizio Cei

  29. Trigger data 1) WFM TICP Fabrizio Cei

  30. Trigger Data 2) Correlation with DRS data DRS Charge Trigger Charge Fabrizio Cei

  31. Trigger Data 3) Low Charge distribution(accidental events collected in 5 ms time window) 10 mV threshold imposed by analysis program (otherwise, the pulse finding algorithm becomes meaningless). Charge distribution for data go down to very small values, as predicted by MC simulation. Red MC Black Data Fabrizio Cei

  32. Results of TICP tests 1) Fabrizio Cei

  33. Results of TICP test 2) Fabrizio Cei

  34. TICP test bar results Fabrizio Cei

  35. Conclusions • The MEG software is in an advanced state of preparation: • MEGMC + MEGBartender: almost finished • MEGAnalyzer: LXe: close to completion; TICP/Z: not very far from end; sufficient effort; DCH: delayed; more effort needed Trigger/Database: ~ ok. • The analysis of RUN 2006 beam test was entirely performed within the general framework, which looks adequate for the whole MEG analysis. Fabrizio Cei

  36. Trigger data 2) Timing RUN 236 (slit at 100 %) RUN 154 (slit at 16 %) 5 microseconds window Time correlated with trigger pulse Fabrizio Cei

  37. Trigger data 2) Charge (T1-T2) vs Log(Q1/Q2) 10 ns time binning (poor resolution); however, well visiblecorrelation Time and charge obtained through fitting operation: Fabrizio Cei

  38. Application to TICP 4) Log(Inner/Outer Charge) Distribution (a z) Red Data Black MC DT vs Log(In/Out Charge) Rough timing algorithm (it selects the pulse start in one 2 ns bin), but reasonable correlation Fabrizio Cei

More Related