JINR and DMS in HCAL and Muon DPG

Moisenz P., JINR Dubna

DPG RDMS Workshop,

CERN, March 12th, 2009

1

HE calibrationHE response in magnetic fieldBeam halo dataCSC timingCSC spatial resolution CSC internal alignmentRemote analysis at JINR

2

HE Calibration with Combined ES/EE/HE Data (TB07)

P. Moisenz (JINR, Dubna, Russia),

RDMS Conf. 14-19 Sept. 2008, Minsk (Belarus)

Introduction

ES, EE, HE calibration

Beam cleaning

Particle identification

Absolute energy scale

Uniformity scan

Sourcing

Cosmic runs analysis

Beam halo

Magnetic field

Spatial resolution

Conclusion

HE calibration for the 1st LHC day

3

Introduction • Muon energy scan

for HE, ES• Energy scan from 2

GeV up to 300 GeV (pion and electron

for HE, EE+HE, ES+EE+HE)

• Spatial resolution scan for HE

• Uniformity scan for ES+EE+HE

• Sourcing EE back plane

4

Test Beam 07

HE

EE

ES

CO2

Freon

BEAM

5

HE L3 CalibrationEbeam for e beam

Ebeam·π/e for π beam

π/e=1+(e/h-1)·α·log(Ebeam)

e/h

e/h and α are from

• a priori knowledge of detector

• simulation

• experimental data

44 cal. coeff.

from calib. region

HE prototype

•pions from 20GeV up to 300GeV•electrons from 20GeV up to 150GeV•total number of showers is ≈ 260000

····

6

HE Standalone Absolute Energy Scale (η=19.5, φ=14.5 )

Linearity from energy correctionEnergy resolution from π/e energy correction

7

HE Combine Absolute Energy Scale (η=19.5, φ=14.5 )

EE<1GeV (mip) EE≥1GeV (mip)

8

Wire source signal distribution

9

HE gains with Sourcing

Source Purchase Original

(Co-60) Date Activity

RP4171 Dec 2005 186MBq HE+ sourcing Feb 2006

RP4168 Dec 2005 146MBq TB07 sourcing

Mean value of TB07 sourcing (with collimated source

normalization) is .2338fC.

In Feb 2006 RP4168 had 21.5/5.271*.2338=.2848fC.

With RP4171 normalization .2848*186/146=.3628fC.

In normal mode - .3628/3=.1209fC or

.1209fC*.19345GeV/fC=.0234GeV

HE gains distribution with TB07 data

AW/AC ratio vs η for

4th layer (φ=3)

Vardan Khachatryan

Muon Energy Deposition (TB07 vs CRAFT08)

10

TB07 CRAFT08

2.656·cos(η=1.603)=2.449GeV 2.859·.88=2.516GeV

Due to track slope Due to π- (50GeV) calibration

STUDY OF MAGNETIC FIELD INFLUENCE ON HE

RESPONSE(CRAFT ReReco Data)

Moisenz P., Khachatryan V. JINR, Dubna, DPG meeting, February 23th, 2009

Introduction

CRAFT Rereco Data

Conclusion

11

HE Response in Magnetic field

New CRAFT Data (ReReco)

12

CRAFT Reco CRAFT ReReco

For CRAFT Data (ReReco) we have - new individual (π 50GeV) HE calibrations both for B=0T and B=3.8T with factor 1.08 - new tracker software - new CSC alignment

TRACKER

ME1/1

CRAFT: Software Trigger

• Two segments from CSC stations as minimum (ME1/1 +some other)

• Track is in tracker

• Signals from HE track association towers

• 17≤HETOWER≤29

• 60 ≤Track Slope ≤ 500

• Momentum ≥ 7GeV

• Track intersects front/backplane of HE

• For 0T track is in CSCs and DTs

CTHEME1/1

13

CMSSW_2_2_3/Cosmics/Commissioning08_CRAFT_ALL_V4_ReReco-v1/RECONZS mode

CRAFT: HE- Data

14

B=3.8T

B=0T

CRAFT: HE Signal vs Magnetic Field

15

E(3.8T)/E(0T) vs Energy cut

1.00327x1.08=1.0835 (±.0125)Due to tick of layer 0

CMS magnetic field (3.8T) increases scintilator brightening up to 8.35 (±.0125) %

Plans

• CRAFT08 Re-reprocessing data analysis

• CRAFT09 data analysis (Traker+ES+HE)

• HE calibration testing with CSC data

• HE timing (?)

• Simulation

16

17

HE and EMU Combined Operation( Beam Halo data)

• Introduction• HE Energy deposition • ME timing study with HE response•Conclusion

Vladimir KarjavinPeter Moisenz Alexey KamenevVardan KhachatryanCSC DPG+Commissioning meeting, 16 October, 2008, CERN

Beam Halo Data and CSC Timing

18

1st Beam Halo Signals in HE

• Software Muon Trigger from CSC • Two segments from CSC stations as minimum

(ME1/1 +some other)• Signals from HE towers associated track

• 17≤HETOWER≤29

• Track Slope ≤50

19

Beam Halo Signals in CSCsCSC Rechits (belong to tracks) distribution

All CSC ME1/1 is active

Asymmetry in x, y axis

20

Beam Halo Signals in CSCs Track Slope Distribution

Beam halo tracks “source” distance: z≈-56m

56m is here

21

Beam Halo Signals in HEHE Energy Deposition

HE energy deposition associated with CSC tracks

22

Rechits collection criteria: HE towers associated with CSC track

HE Energy Deposition with Beam Halo Data

Good matching of the Beam test results

TB07µ 225GeV

23

HE Timing from Splash Events

HE- HE+

J. Damgov

24

Raw Signal from HE Towers (sum in 10 time slices)

Cut for muons = 8ADC

Single tower has muon signal if sum of amplitudes (in 0÷9 time slices) >8ADC

25

CSC Timing with HE+

26

CSC Timing with HE-

27

Summary

HE energy deposition associated with CSC tracks:

good matching of the results obtained with Beam test and Beam halo data

Analysis of ME timing with Beam Halo tracks shows:• timing distribution (mean value) from all ME stations: ~ 1BX• possibility of precise time calibration of ME chambers

28

ME1/1b, ME2/1 and ME3/1 Spatial Resolution from CRAFT data

Vladimir Palichik, Peter Moissenz, Dubna, JINR

CSC DPG meetingMarch 05, 2009

CSC Spatial resolution

29

ME1/1b, ME2/1 & ME3/1 Spatial Resolution from CRAFT data

4 methods to estimate CSC resolution:

I) Studentized residuals between a strip hit coordinate in the plane and the fitted track coordinate in this plane from a straight line uniformly precise 6-point fit (is used for ME1/1b; is not convenient for ME2 & ME3 due to strip staggering)

II) Residuals between a strip hit coordinate in the 3rd (4th ) plane and the predicted track coordinate in this plane from a straight line fit of hits in the remaining 5 planes

III) distributions for Residual Sum of Squares (RSS) for all 6 hits line fit (as it was shown at the meeting on 29.01.09, the results obtained were underestimated)

IV) Two independent (separate) 3-point fits in two strip regions (see page 7)

30

ME1/1b Resolution from CRAFT

Method I

b = 112 m per Layer

In comparison to the results presented at CMS Week in Dec.2008 we use the more soft thresholds for criteria

b ~ 50-55 m per Station

i.e.:

ME1/1b

ME1/1b Spatial Resolution after additional cross-talk corrections (see 08.12.08 report at CMS Week)

= 1.87 % of strip width

Resolution versus Radius

31

ME2/1 Residuals from CRAFT for 2 regions across a strip width

Strip region 0.25-0.5 (strip edges)

Strip region 0-0.25 (strip center)

2= 580 m

= 328 m

Method II (shown 29.01.09)

Similar results have been obtained for ME3/1

1/(Station) = 3/

As in CMS NOTE 2007/023, V.Barashko et al.

= 166 m

32

ME2/1 Studentized Residuals for 2 regions across a strip width

Method IV

The similar results have been obtained for ME3/1:

1/(Station) = 3/

= 133 m

= 252 m 2= 560 m

Strip region 0.25 - 0.5 (strip edges)

Strip region 0 - 0.25 (strip center)

Si – square of i-th Gaussian

s

ss

g12 +

ss

sg2

2

= 126 m

33

Conclusions: ME1/1b

The satisfied ME1/1b single layer spatial resolution (112 microns) has been obtained from CRAFT data with 3.8 T magnetic field in CMSSW_2_2_0 (several improvements with additional cross-talk corrections) applying the more soft Chi2 cuts (in comparison with Dec.08 CMS Week report); studentized residuals have been used. Thus, ME1/1 outer part spatial resolution per station could be estimated approximately as 50-55 microns.

There are still problems with estimation of ME1/1 inner part resolution due to strip ganging.

34

Conclusions: ME2/1 & ME3/1 2 methods (II-nd and IV-th) have been used to estimate

spatial resolution in the ME2/1 & ME3/1 stations from CRAFT data with 3.8 T magnetic field in CMSSW_2_2_0 :

II) Residuals between a strip hit coordinate in the 3rd (4th ) plane and the predicted track coordinate in this plane from a straight line fit of hits in the remaining 5 planes:

(ME2/1 station) = 166 microns

(ME3/1 station) = 176 microns

IV) Two 3-point fits in central & edge strip regions separately with studentized residuals:

(ME2/1 station) = 133 microns (ME3/1 station) = 126 microns

Plan CSC spatial resolution with uncorrelated

background

We suppose these results are overestimated

ME1/1 internal alignment with MTCC data (status and plans)

I. Belotelov, A. Kamenev, P. Moisenz (JINR, Dubna),

EMU ME1/1 Meeting,

16.06.07, CERN

CSC Internal alignment

35

Outer layer fix: method details

• Select segments with 2 rec hit in outer layers

• Construct the straight line using these 2 outer hits

• Collect the residuals in 4 inner layers.• For misalignment studies, residuals

are collected to 10 histograms per layer (10 ρ-slices per each layer)

• each ρ-slice fitted by gaussian to estimate its shift• all shifts of ρ-slices in layer then

fitted by straight line - it gives layer φ-shift and rotation around z

36

Outer layer fix: layer shift distribution vs MF

• Layer shifts up to 100 of microns, few layers shifted by > 200 microns

• There are clearly detectable -rotations

• Good correspondence with K. Banicz (MTCC) and A. Korytov (FAST sites) results (CSC DPG Meeting, CERN 15.03.07)

• Depending on the selection and track model (polar or cartesian) overall shift for B-on runs sometimes 10-15 microns bigger than for B-off runs.

37

LSQ track fit: coordinate system

The local reference frame XY of each layer is rotated by angle α and than shifted in general reference frame XY. So internal alignment parameters are angle α and shifts Dx and Dy.

38

LSQ track fit: formalismHere are some formulas:

xi

xi

tij bjzaX y

iyi

tij bjzaY

5

0

2

jj bajzX

mmz 22

- functional for best track building

- distance between layers

- best track hits

N

i j yj

jjijjijtij

xj

jjijjijtij yXYYxYXX

1

5

02

2

2

2 ))sin()cos(())sin()cos((

- alignment functional

0

0

0

j

j

j

y

x

- set of equations, to be solved)sin()cos( jjjj

tjj YXXx

)sin()cos( jjjjtjj XYYy

Shifts expressed through rotation angle

0)sin()cos(

11)sin()cos(

11)(sin)(cos

2222

22222222

22

xj

jtjj

t

yj

jtjj

t

jxj

jt

jtj

yj

jtjj

t

j

jjjjyjxj

jjjjjyjxj

jj

XXXXYYYYYXYXXYXY

YXXYYXXY

- equation for the rotation angle

NXXN

iijj /)(

1

NYXXYN

i

tijijj

t /)(1

- notation example

39

LSQ track fit: alignment parameters vs magnetic field

Here are the shifts and rotations for all the 6 layers of all the 6 CSCs for magnetic field 2T, 3.8T, 4T relative the shifts and rotations at 0T. There is no evident dependence.

40

Conclusion

• Internal alignment parameters of ME1/1 CSCs from MTCC data were calculated

• There is no evident dependence of alignment parameters from magnetic field

Plan Internal alignment parameters stability from

MTCC up to CRAFT Internal parameters for all CSCs

41

Remote Analysis at JINR

• Monitoring and Analysis Remote System– Remote monitoring of ME1/1 and HE– Express analysis– DQM– Shifts

• MARS hardware– Server (6TB)– 3 PC (3x.5TB)– 6 (6x.5TB) remote points for physicists (with afs)

42