1 / 12

Update

Update. FTK Meeting 05/02/06 Erik Brubaker U of Chicago. Physics Case Overview. No FTK (TDR). FTK. 1j290 3j130 4j90. Thresh To ??. LVL1. More modern baseline has tracking at LVL2. Time budget is 10 ms/evt at LVL2. Even regional tracking may exceed this…. 100 kHz total. 0.6 kHz.

verlee
Download Presentation

Update

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. Update FTK Meeting 05/02/06 Erik Brubaker U of Chicago

  2. Physics Case Overview No FTK(TDR) FTK 1j290 3j130 4j90 • Thresh To ?? LVL1 More modernbaseline hastracking atLVL2. Time budgetis 10 ms/evtat LVL2.Even regionaltracking mayexceed this… 100 kHztotal 0.6 kHz ~5 kHz 1j290 3j130 4j90 • Thresh+ b-tags+ t ID LVL2 2000 Hztotal 280 Hz 280 Hz FTK Meeting

  3. Physics Case Statement #1 FTK vs TDR menus,i.e. no tracking atLVL2—ignore timing. Statement #2 FTK vs nominal LVL2,incl. tracking. Need: • FTK allows b-jet (t)ID w/ eb, ec, eq, et. • Correlation w/ offline? • Depends on environment • LVL1 trigger rate, drivenby multijet evts, estimatedusing modern generator +parametrization of fullATLAS LVL1 simulation. Fix LVL2 outputrate. Limit LVL1 outputrate to sth reasonable. Optimize LVL1 cuts& LVL2 tagging reqs, maximizing signal acceptance/significance. Same as stmt #1,but add triggertiming into the eqs. Hard to estimate,large uncertainties. But more realistic,stronger case. FTK Meeting

  4. Estimating LVL1 rates • LVL1 rate ≈ LVL1 QCD rate. • Jets 3 & 4 important for our processes • Use generator w/ ME description of these jets; also need appropriate ME/PS matching: Sherpa. • Rates may be dominated by tails of LVL1 response. • Use fast simulation of multijets, parametrize response of LVL1 using fully simulated dijet events. FTK Meeting

  5. Sherpa+ATLFAST status • 10M evts produced using 22 + 23 ME processes, with ycut = [20, 25] GeV. • Also 10M with just 22 ME, ycut = 25 GeV for comparison. • 22 + 23 + 24 ME is ready for production, but tier2 condor problems causing delay. • Known problems/questions (waiting to hear from authors): • ME does not include b quarks. Should be easy to add. • UE/MPI turned off by default. Does Sherpa include a model reasonable for LHC? • Error messages on ~2% of events. Relevant? FTK Meeting

  6. LVL1 Jet Trigger Response • Updated parametrization for jet response available, using 11.0.42. • http://hep.uchicago.edu/~brubaker/misc/useFitFunction.C • Now using uncalibrated, unsmeared ATLFAST jets as starting point. • Calibration made biggest difference. • New CSC dijet samples are finishing up on CAFs around the world. • Big problems getting at data in ATLAS… The total pass rate is dominated by a small fraction of the Sherpa events. So statistics can still be a problem. 10M looks OK, here for a 4j40 LVL1 trigger. FTK Meeting

  7. LVL1 Jet Trigger Response (2) 10.3.0 J6 LVL1 jet trig resp 11.0.41 FTK Meeting

  8. LVL1 Tau Trigger Response • Tau-trigger response fit in progress. • Could LVL1 trig rate get sizeable contribution from real taus? If so, need tt parametrization. t cluster ET response LVL1 t ET (GeV) ATLFASTjet pT (GeV) ATLFASTjet pT (GeV) FTK Meeting

  9. Trigger Timing Issues • http://hepunx.rl.ac.uk/atlasuk/simulation/level2/meetings/PESAlvl2IDswReview2005/TIMENOTE/l2time_note.pdf : LVL2 tracking timing note, summer 2005. FTK Meeting

  10. Timing prospects • Table on previous page is time per RoI, using 0.2x0.2 size. • They show potential factor of 2 improvements. • Adjust for larger RoI size to do b-tagging: x5. • Adjust for # of RoI per typical event: x4. • So that makes 120 ± 100 ms per event—budget is 10 ms! • John Baines guesses another factor of 2 possible. • $1MQ: What is the irreducible time per event, even if FTK provides tracks? Must be < 10 ms… FTK Meeting

  11. Next steps • Physics case note started. • Apply everything to Hhh4b channel. • Improvements to sherpa samples and parametrizations if not too disruptive or time-consuming. • Incoming UC grad student can work on VBF Hbb. FTK Meeting

  12. Reconstructed mh/H for bkgd New large Sherpa sample w/ new LVL1 parametrization FTK Meeting

More Related