1 / 20

News from May Cosmics GC Jacques & Yasmine

News from May Cosmics GC Jacques & Yasmine. 16 mai 2008. Selection of Yasmin transparencies. For the full story consult http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=34031. Plan for the discussion. « It’s all about timing »   Yasmine has a plane to take @ 18h50 :-)

simone-rodriguez
Download Presentation

News from May Cosmics GC Jacques & Yasmine

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. News from May Cosmics GCJacques & Yasmine 16 mai 2008

  2. Selection of Yasmin transparencies • For the full story consult • http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=34031

  3. Plan for the discussion « It’s all about timing »   Yasmine has a plane to take @ 18h50 :-) • 1Zone by zone analysis  needs brainstorming • 2Efficiency of the selection  We have an explanation • 3High multiplicity events  Irina suggests in her mail a way of understanding this.

  4. data • Run 22476 from GC May 08. • We started to worry because: • We noticed that the rms of the asymmetry Was worse then what we had in the previous run (10/04/08). • We made the same plots as usual ref: mail from Jacques Jeudi 8 mai only we seperate them for each zone of the ECAL and the HCAL see slide .

  5. HCALCurrent/Next Outer

  6. HCALCurrent/Prev Inner

  7. Up to now the HCAL • 2 noisy cells in HCAL =>worsen timing => to be removed • The behaviour of the HCAL seems fine: 1We have roughly the same number of events in the Current/Next or Current/Prev. 2 the difference of the statistics between the Outer and the inner zone is consistent with the geometry of both regions.

  8. ECALCurrent/Next Outer

  9. ECALCurrent/Next Middle

  10. ECALCurrent/Next Inner

  11. Up to now ECAL ouch! • The middle ECAL seems fine. • The outer ECAL is strange we see only 25 Current/Next events for 600 events in the Current/Prev! • The amount of selected events in the inner ECAL is really small 8 Current/Next events and 0 Current/Prev events!!!

  12. Old remaining pbs! • We go back to the run of march A side 20876 • We start with 13686 and we end up with 663 for the coincidence  the efficiency of the whole selection is 4.8 % while from the trigger side we know that we should have 95% good cosmics. Question: Where do we loose them?

  13. What we do in detail For each cell: ADC(P)+ADC(C) > 150 or ADC(C)+ADC(N) > 150 for the ECAL (resp 20 HCAL) For each Event : Condition2: Hits >1 Condition3: |R|<0.8 We always have two sets of events, events which appear in the Current/Next or Current/Prev. Note: In the following the conditions 1,2,3 will be Refered as C1, C2,C3. Condition 1

  14. Selection in detailRun 14 Mars • HCAL • Current/Prev: • After C1 : 5965 • After C2: 5084 • After C3: 3259 • Current/Next: • After C1: 6828 • After C2: 5105 • After C3: 148 • ECAL • Current/Prev • After C1: 4524 • After C2: 3796 • After C3: 968 • Current/Next: • After C1: 7286 • After C2: 6420 • After C3: 27 • Note: Within in ECAL events 32 are not usuable #  of hits>60.

  15. So • For the Current/Prev Events we loose a lot !This is explained by the fact that in this run we had a +7 ns offset computed from the fit. • For the Current/Next Event we loose almost everything because of the extra L0DU delay that we had in this run! In the analysis we looked at Prev1/Current/Next1 but really the cosmics were in Prev2/Prev1/Current! • To validate these hypothesis, we should look at the selection efficiency for a run where the offsets in the TTCRx were corrected and where we have no pb with the L0DUNext slide

  16. 10 April Run C side But the offsetin the TTCRxwere corrected • ECAL • Current/Next • After C1:5752 • After C2: 4921 • After C3:2955 • Current/Prev • After C1: 4985 • After C2: 4467 • After C3: 2888 • HCAL • Current/Prev • After C1: 5808 • After C2:5097 • After C3:3375 • Current/Next • After C1 : 4636 • After C2: 3911 • After C3: 2918 Conclusion for part 2: We Start with 10893 Events out of which 2907 were used for the coincidence study We have 28% of efficiency  which sounds reasonable!

  17. Either a super nova? but most probably something that we need to understand! We saw this previously in March. Event 588 Run 22476

  18. Summary of events with mutiplicity > 60 • 9 events in total. • 8 are always in the same Y region  according to Irina these events might be actually LED Events. • 1 Event doesn’t belong to this region see event display in the following slide.

  19. Event 21408 Ecal Prs Hcal Bremsstralhung?? From Olivier

  20. Conclusion of Friday • Difference between outer middle inner ECAL could be crate timing problem? Or tell1 problem? Look at -2 events (when Yasmin back) • The big flare event could be unvolontary LED (some pin diode signal) but why not all cells (16/LED). How can all LED triggers when LEDTSB cycles by groups of LED • Efficiency when timed is OK => program for other users

More Related