EMCAL Reconstruction in Pass6 2009 - pp 900 GeV

24
1 EMCAL Reconstruction in Pass6 2009 - pp 900 GeV 29/03/2010 Gustavo Conesa Balbastre

description

EMCAL Reconstruction in Pass6 2009 - pp 900 GeV. 29/03/2010 Gustavo Conesa Balbastre. Intro. Changes in the raw fitting with respect to pass5 (David S. has the details): Raw Sample selection Time measurement Hardcoded default parameters … Fitter is kStandard (TMinuit) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of EMCAL Reconstruction in Pass6 2009 - pp 900 GeV

Page 1: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

1

EMCAL Reconstruction in Pass6

2009 - pp 900 GeV

29/03/2010

Gustavo Conesa Balbastre

Page 2: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

2

Intro• Changes in the raw fitting with respect to pass5

(David S. has the details):– Raw Sample selection– Time measurement– Hardcoded default parameters – …

• Fitter is kStandard (TMinuit)– Other fast fitters (3) under test but we are still trying to

decide which one will replace the kStandard.– Decision to be made doing tests with data … but 2009 data

has a problem …

• We discovered last week that our raw data is corrupted … – possible explanation of most of the pi0 peak shift. – Fixed (hopefully) for next data taking.– More details in last slides.

Page 3: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

3

Energy distributions

Low cell energy rejected in pass 5, clear effect in all the cluster Energy.In pass6 new 3 noisy channels in all the events, with low energy, 0.1-0.2 GeV

Page 4: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

4

Energy distributions pass5/pass6

• Low cell energy rejected in pass 5, clear effect in all the cluster Energy.• In pass6 new 3 noisy channels in all the events, with low energy, 0.1-0.2 GeV

Page 5: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

5

Number of cells per cluster: Pass5/6

Pass5Pass5

Pass6Pass6

Increase the number of cells per cluster from pass5 to pass6

Page 6: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

6

Number of cells per cluster: Simulation (LHC09d10) vs Pass5

Pass5 number of cells per cluster much smaller than in simulation

Page 7: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

7

Number of cells per cluster: Simulation (LHC09d10) vs Pass6Better agreement between the simulation and data, although simulation has not the same calibration parameters so we are maybe not comparing really apples to apples.

Page 8: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

8

Pi0 Invariant Mass Distribution

pass6pass5

• Peak shifted, in the good direction, about 10 MeV upper in pass6.• More pairs in new pass due to the higher number of small signal channels. Background also higher due to more noisy (low signal) channels.

• different event statistic in both passes, less analyzed in pass6

Page 9: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

9

Pi0 Masspass5 pass6

• There is still a shift of 30 MeV (30% decalibration) to the expected position (M = 135 MeV/c2)• No improvement seen on the width.

Page 10: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

10

Cell Time measurement

• Time of clusters concentrated in 500-600 ns (peaks at 500 and 600 ns for pass6). More simmetric distributions in pass6.• Need to access to the T0 of the event to calculate the Time of Flight.• The RCU clocks are running at 10 MHz and we are not sure that they are all on the same phase with respect to the beam clock, or if the phase is stable over time. This might effect, need to do more check comparing different RCU regions

Page 11: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

11

Track Matching

-Problems with TPC? No changes in TPC for this pass so it shouldn’t.-Change in our code? In principle nothing changed in the tracking code or the geometry between the passes.

Somehow the larger number of low energy noisy clusters destroys matching?

Page 12: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

12

Cluster-Track in pass6

• Track propagation done with AliEMCALTracker, same used for matching.

• Looks reasonable

Page 13: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

13

Cluster - Track in pass 6Residuals

• Track propagation done with AliEMCALTracker, same used for matching• Looks reasonable except “y” which is shifted 3 cm. This does not happen with cosmic data.

Page 14: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

14

Cluster-Track Pass2 CosmicResiduals

Page 15: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

15

EMCAL Calibration• EMCal “Calibration Mystery” solved…

– Due to “Variable Pedestal” subtraction method used for 900 GeV p+p data• Variable pedestal calculated automatically and subtracted from signal

• Tested and confirmed to give same result (max-min) as for no pedestal subtraction, for EMCal with LED signals

– But, for LEDs triggered by TRU on receipt of L0, » I.e. LED pulse arrives AFTER L0 in post-samples

– Problem first reported by PHOS about 3 weeks ago… • Apparently (obviously), the pedestal calculation stops on receipt of L0 signal and USES

the presample region for pedestal calculation.– Signal cannot fall into presample region!!!– But L0 arrives 1.2us after interaction…– It’s in the RCU manual…

– EMCal signal entirely in presample region…• Effect on EMCal signals?

L0

PHOS

Time bin

Page 16: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

16

EMCAL Calibration

• Observe that signal is ~0.7 smaller with variable pedestal subtraction

• Does not seem to depend on amplitude, but does depend on RCU (time bin?)

• Further studies needed with varying LED delays to investigate dependence.

• Hopefully, it will be a single overall scale correction.

Page 17: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

17

Back up

Page 18: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

18

Energy spectra

Page 19: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

19

Energy Ratio kX /pass6

• What happens at 0.5 GeV with kCrude?• Pass6 like kCrude, similar trend, a bit higher except at 0.5.• Pass5 similar to kCrude for high energy cells, we throw away low energy cells, < 0.5 GeV. At cluster level smaller number because of less low energy cells?•kPeakFinder 90% of kCrude, same trend. •kLMS almost = kFastFit lower increasing energy.•kNeuralNet very different.

Page 20: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

20

Cell Time

Time : All new fitters have some discrete values, kPeakFinder almost only discrete, kCrude only discrete.

Page 21: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

21

Pi0 Invariant Mass DistributionkPeakFinderpass6 kNeuralNet

kFastFit kLMS kCrude

Page 22: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

22

Pi0 Masspass6 kPeakFinder kNeuralNet

kFastFit kLMS kCrude

Page 23: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

23

Pi0 Width

Pass5 Pass6

No improvement observed on the width

Page 24: EMCAL Reconstruction in  Pass6  2009 - pp 900 GeV

24

Pi0 WidthPass6 kPeakFinder kNeuralNet

kFastFit kLMS kCrude