1 / 15

Cambridge data analysis work

Cambridge data analysis work. David Ward Main focus – data-MC comparisons Using “official” reconstructed files Up to now restricted to ECAL data. TexPoint fonts used in EMF. Read the TexPoint manual before you delete this box.: A A A A A A. Linearity. “Official calibrations”

vinaya
Download Presentation

Cambridge data analysis work

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. Cambridge data analysis work David Ward Main focus – data-MC comparisons Using “official” reconstructed files Up to now restricted to ECAL data David Ward TexPoint fonts used in EMF. Read the TexPoint manual before you delete this box.: AAAAAA

  2. Linearity • “Official calibrations” • Select events in central parts of wafers • [-1,+2]s.d. Gaussian fit David Ward

  3. Linearity Mostly within 1-2%, but several obvious problems and inconsistencies, so plenty still to be done. DESY MC – missing layers David Ward

  4. Resolution Line is just to guide the eye. We can see it corresponds roughly to 15%/√E+1% Encouraging? David Ward

  5. Hit energies ? David Ward

  6. Hit energies DESY Run 230137 (6 GeV) Red – reconstructed with v0402 Yellow - reconstructed with v0301 What happened?? Calibration issue? David Ward

  7. Profiles Longitudinal – data showers earlier than Monte Carlo. Upstream material? Tungsten properties? Transverse – data seems broader than MC. Noise? Upstream material? Alignment? David Ward

  8. Energy in layer 1 1 GeV DESY 6 GeV DESY 40 GeV CERN 30 GeV CERN David Ward

  9. Depends on running conditions 20 GeV : Aug’06 20 GeV : Oct’06 David Ward

  10. Depends on running conditions 20 GeV : Aug’06 20 GeV : Oct’06 David Ward

  11. Beam profiles MC modelled as Gaussians 25m upstream. + crude trigger simulation. Not doing badly, but not right; could be affecting other comparisons. David Ward

  12. Energy across gaps Dip in response across gaps. MC (red) gives bigger dip. Width of gaps? Alignment in data? David Ward

  13. Alignment? Suggests beam tilted wrt ECAL in data (black) by about 10 mrad MC (red) generated at normal incidence; detailed structure resulting from stagger doesn’t seem to be mirrored in data. David Ward

  14. Alignment study (Wenbiao) • DESY data. • Tracking in drift chambers using Michele’s code to predict position in each layer of ECAL • Plot <Xcog+Xfit> in each layer n.b. find anticorrelation between Xcog and Xfit. Hence + sign above. Also overall offset. • Any evidence of misalignment? David Ward

  15. George Mavromanolakis • George is at Fermilab this year. Plans include the following: • ECAL position resolution; inhomogeneity; Moliere radius (using May’06 DESY data). • ECAL calibration using muons (with Marcel Reinhard) • Monitoring for DHCAL slice test @ FNAL; also for Japanese scintillator strip ECAL tests. • Longer term - interested in ECAL/HCAL/TCMT data analysis. David Ward

More Related