1 / 14

Tracking and Validation

Tracking and Validation. What kind of feedbacks tracking can provide? This talk: by no mean, a working package; more likely a messy collection of first ideas. Effects on tracking. The momentum measurement depends on: Efficiencies of first and second coordinates measurements devices

olin
Download Presentation

Tracking and Validation

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. Tracking and Validation • What kind of feedbacks tracking can provide? • This talk: by no mean, a working package; more likely a messy collection of first ideas 15/12/04 Cern

  2. Effects on tracking • The momentum measurement depends on: • Efficiencies of first and second coordinates measurements devices • Resolution of precise measurements, i.e. R-T relations • Magnetic Field • Correction of Energy losses in calorimeters • Alignment of chambers • Robustness of reconstruction program (not addressed here) The challenge is to disentangle their different effects One should take advantage of the different detector configurations (Cosmics, Toroid on/off) and try to study the different effect as soon as possible e.g. check alignment before to have to figure out how it mixes with E losses and Magnetic Field to build the Z peak 15/12/04 Cern

  3. Devices functioning: checking efficiencies • 1st coordinate trigger measurement is predictable from precise measurements (MDT), so check is local and easy (segment reconstruction is enough) • One 2nd coord measurement is enough to build the track (in Muonboy at least) so prediction can be made on other 2nd coord devices and 2nd checked • 1st coordinate precise measurements • Tracks: exploiting angle-angle reconstruction, one can predict measurements in one chamber using the 2 others, and check 1st (experienced in H8) • Segments: special reconstruction with N-1 tubes, check the remaining; give tube vs impact parameter (a.f.a.I.k. not done in H8) 15/12/04 Cern

  4. Devices functioning: checking efficiencies • Efficiencies can be checked what ever the detector configuration is • if one takes a position matching criteria at cm level (2nd coord.), approximate Alignment and Magnetic Field are Ok • Toroid off offers only the advantage of simpler trajectories • Some dedicated settings of the reconstruction programs are required (exclusion of device under test, or of “sick” devices); quite similar to H8; not a big deal • Time scale: for a 95% efficiency, +/-0.5% is obtained at chamber level in ~10 hours with cosmics (~1 hour at at 1033cm-2s-1 ) • With cosmics, all dead channels will be easily mapped 15/12/04 Cern

  5. Devices functioning: R-T relation • Check can be local and segments reconstruction is then enough • Typical checks are those done in H8 now: residual distribution vs 1st, vs 2nd coordinate, vs radius digits/segments radius distribution… <Resid>vs radius <Resid>vs radius residual resid. vs radius digit radius H8 2004 track radius 15/12/04 Cern

  6. Devices functioning: R-T relation • R-T can be checked without special setting of reconstruction • To some extent, tracks can provide consistency check between 2nd coord. dependence of RT (60/200.5 =13 cm), and 2nd coord. Measurements (cm) • It is important to do these checks with Toroid off and on, to evaluate Lorentz angle correction in R-T relation • For a residual width of 80 m, +/-1 m is reached at chamber level in, ~10 h with cosmics (~1 h at 1033cm-2s-1) • For Lorentz effect study, 2nd coordinate should be sampled; ~factor 6 in statistic if half meter scale is aimed 15/12/04 Cern

  7. Checking alignment with straight tracks • “Since curvature is known for straight tracks”, they can be used to check absolute alignment delivered by optical alignment system: measured sagitta should be null Sagitta/with ali H8 2003 Sagitta/No ali Sagitta vs 1st coord • Typical feedbacks H8 analysis: checks that optical alignment compensates chambers movements, see remaining misalignments in sagitta dependencies of 1st and 2nd coordinates, .. • Up to now, H8 data have not been used to outline a procedure Observed Sagitta  Chamber Positions (work just started) 15/12/04 Cern

  8. Checking alignment with cosmics • Estimates from C.Guyot, 10 k muons per chamber tower (12 parameters) needed to reach 20m: ~2-3 days (~6 h at 1033cm-2s-1) Need projective tracks PERSINT Muonboy reconstruction • Pattern recognition is not an issue with cosmics • Muonboy without algorithmic changes reconstruct projective cosmics tracks PERSINT Muonboy reconstruction • The only issue is timing: inversed time sequence and starting point (TOF correction). Not trivial but not major issue 15/12/04 Cern

  9. Non projective cosmics tracks • One can envision full 3D tower reconstruction (à la Datcha UA1, 50K muons10m) Need non projective tracks (both for 3D reconstruction and rate) • Tracking is not yet adapted to this as illustrated by the extreme case of Halo event reconstruction PERSINT Muonboy reconstruction Reconstruction should be changed Pointing criteria should be relaxed; fake tracks should be controlled 15/12/04 Cern

  10. Matter with straight tracks • In the 20-100 GeV range, Multiple Scattering dominates spectrometer resolution and the dead matter is highly non uniformly distributed Muonboy resolution analytical evaluation • At the low momenta of the straight tracks considered here (20 GeV), sagitta width (~600 m) is dominated by M.S. in spectro • Matter distribution within spectrometer is in principle checkable: ~1 day with cosmics (~2 h at 1033cm-2s-1 ) to trace 10% variation of X0 at 10 cm scale 15/12/04 Cern

  11. Alignment with ID (Toroid on or off) • From the point of view of measurement improvement (enlarged lever arm for 1TeV muon), 200 m is the target (width due to MS in calo at 1 TeV). This is easily done • In ~1 day at 1033cm-2s-1, the muons from Z decay allow to check alignment of the ID with each physical tower at that level (~350 control points) • This is 5% of the MS width for 50 GeV ; according to a very old study (Cetraro 97) this could be translated in a control of the longitudinal and ortho-radial components of Magnetic field in Tile at 250 Gauss level • It is worth to study to which extent the alignment ID/Spectro, with or without toroid field, could be a mean to understand B and possibly Eloss in calo 15/12/04 Cern

  12. Special Tracking to study alignment in overlap areas (Toroid on) Check alignment of independents sections with tracks Reconstruction should be modified • Overlap areas: • Small/Large chambers Barrel or End Cap • Barrel/End cap transition • BIS7/BIS8, BEE/End Cap • Special reconstruction is needed: measurement in one area; prediction in the other area; comparison with measurement there (NB: For barrel, tracking will directly provide the small/large chambers alignment) PERSINT Small/large sectors 15/12/04 Cern

  13. Momentum measurement • At that time, (Efficiencies, R-T) will be understood and under control. • Remaining effects, Alignment, Magnetic Field and E losses will mix in any momentum measurement. • Only Alignment will have been checked before. Further checks, will be obtained comparing 3 points and angle-angle reconstructions • To disentangle Alignment, Magnetic Field and E losses effects, 2 handles (both still need detail studies with full simulations): • Momentum comparison with ID • (PID-PMS) or PID/PMS or F(PID,PMS) signed or not vs , , pT B, Eloss, Alignment effects have different dependencies on kinetic variables (p Bp; p p+E; p p/(1+a/s)) • Resonances: • Estimate (C.Guyot) 44X32 (,) bins (4 bins per tower) 2.106Z2 (1 month)=> (B)~4.10-4, (a)=15m Toy MC, 2 effects out of 3, systematics still to be studied 15/12/04 Cern

  14. Conclusions • Efficiencies and R-T: • Tracking feedbacks will be H8 like (although much more effects to be studied) • No major change of reconstruction needed • Alignment: • Check alignment with straight lines tracks, with tracks in overlaps • Reconstruction changes needed • for non projective cosmics tracks (Not a pattern recognition issue) • optional underweighting of some areas w.r.t. others • Still missing but work started: Observed Sagitta->Chambers positions procedure; to be validated both in H8 and in full simulations • Dedicated studies: • check Spectrometer matter distribution through sagitta width • Magnetic Field and E loss (?) in Tile by ID/Spectro alignment • Disentangling Magnetic Field/Alignment/E losses effects: one needs detailed simulations of the potential of the comparison between ID and Spectrometer measurements and of the Z peak 15/12/04 Cern

More Related