1 / 71

Status Report of The CMS Experiment

Status Report of The CMS Experiment. Christos Leonidopoulos CERN-PH on behalf of the CMS Collaboration. 102 nd LHCC Meeting, CERN 7 July 2010. The Collaboration.

lacey
Télécharger la présentation

Status Report of The CMS Experiment

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. Status Report of The CMS Experiment Christos Leonidopoulos CERN-PH on behalf of the CMS Collaboration 102nd LHCC Meeting, CERN 7 July 2010

  2. The Collaboration • AACHEN-1, AACHEN-3A, AACHEN-3B, ADANA-CUKUROVA, ANKARA-METU, ANTWERPEN, ATHENS, ATOMKI, AUCKLAND, BARI, BEIJING-IHEP, BOGAZICI, BOLOGNA, BOSTON-UNIV, BRISTOL, BROWN-UNIV, BRUNEL, BRUSSEL-VUB, BRUXELLES-ULB, BUDAPEST, CALTECH, CANTERBURY, CARNEGIE-MELLON, CATANIA, CCCS-UWE, CERN, CHANDIGARH, CHEJU, ILLINOIS-CHICAGO, CHONNAM, CHUNGBUK, CHUNGLI-NCU, COLORADO, CORNELL, DEBRECEN-IEP, DELHI-UNIV, DEMOKRITOS, DESY, DONGSHIN, DUBLIN-UCD, DUBNA, EINDHOVEN, FAIRFIELD, FERMILAB, FIRENZE, FLORIDA-FIU, FLORIDA-STATE, FLORIDA-TECH, FLORIDA-UNIV, FRASCATI, GENOVA, GHENT, HAMBURG-UNIV, HEFEI-USTC, HELSINKI-HIP, HELSINKI-UNIV, HEPHY, IOANNINA, IOWA, IPM, ISLAMABAD-NCP, JOHNS-HOPKINS, KANGWON, KANSAS-STATE, KANSAS-UNIV, KARLSRUHE-IEKP, KHARKOV-ISC, KHARKOV-KIPT, KHARKOV-KSU, KONKUK-UNIV, KOREA-UNIV, KYUNGPOOK, LAPP, LAPPEENRANTA-LUT, LIP, LIVERMORE, LONDON-IC, LOUVAIN, LYON, MADRID-CIEMAT, MADRID-UNIV, MARYLAND, MEXICO-IBEROAM, MEXICO-IPN, MEXICO-PUEBLA, MEXICO-UASLP, MILANO-BICOCCA, MINNESOTA, MINSK-INP, MINSK-NCPHEP, MINSK-RIAPP, MINSK-UNIV, MISSISSIPPI, MIT, MONS, MOSCOW-INR, MOSCOW-ITEP, MOSCOW-LEBEDEV, MOSCOW-MSU, MOSCOW-RDIPE, MUMBAI-BARC, MYASISHCHEV, NAPOLI, NEBRASKA, NICOSIA-UNIV, NORTHEASTERN, NORTHWESTERN, NOTRE DAME, NUST, OHIO-STATE, OVIEDO, PADOVA, PAVIA, PEKING-UNIV, PERUGIA, PISA, POLYTECHNIQUE, PRINCETON, PROTVINO, PSI, PUERTO RICO, PURDUE, PURDUE-CALUMET, RAL, RICE, RIE, RIO-CBPF, RIO-UERJ, ROCHESTER, ROCKEFELLER, ROMA-1, RUTGERS, SACLAY, SANTANDER, SAO PAULO, SEONAM, SEOUL-EDU, SEOUL-SNU, SHANGHAI-IC, SKK-UNIV, SOFIA-CLMI, SOFIA-INRNE, SOFIA-UNIV, SPLIT-FESB, SPLIT-UNIV, ST-PETERSBURG, STRASBOURG, SUNY-BUFFALO, TAIPEI-NTU, TALLINN, TASHKENT, TBILISI-IHEPI, TBILISI-IPAS, TENNESSEE, TEXAS-TAMU, TEXAS-TECH, TIFR-EHEP, TIFR-HECR, TORINO, TRIESTE, UCDAVIS, UCLA, UC RIVERSIDE, UC SANTA BARBARA, UC SAN DIEGO, UNIANDES, VANDERBILT, VILNIUS-ACADEMY, VILNIUS-UNIV, VINCA, VIRGINIA-TECH, VIRGINIA-UNIV, WARSAW-IEP, WARSAW-INS, WARSAW-ISE, WAYNE, WISCONSIN, WONKWANG, YEREVAN, ZAGREB-RUDJER, ZURICH-ETH, ZURICH-UNIV • 182 Institutions • 3000 scientists and engineers • 2000 Authors

  3. Reminder: we went from this… 3.8T Superconducting Solenoid Hermetic (|η|<5.2) Hadron Calorimeter (HCAL) [scintillators & brass] Lead tungstate E/M Calorimeter (ECAL) All Silicon Tracker (Pixels and Microstrips) Redundant Muon System (RPCs, Drift Tubes, Cathode Strip Chambers)

  4. …to this First 7 TeV collisions in CMS – 30 March 2010

  5. …and this, just three months later

  6. Life did not begin in a vacuumwith the first collisions

  7. One Billion Cosmic Muons before collisions

  8. 23 JINST papers: March 2010 (Vol. 5) Feedback into realistic simulation to help us prepare for collisions

  9. Detector understanding • Claim: • Cosmic runs/beam tests have made a difference • First data distributions agree well with simulation • “Why should we believe that the simulation correctly describes the detector performance?” • Excellent question! • TeVatron experience: it takes a long time to commission & understand collider experiments • Accelerator, detector, trigger, background, underlying event, software: very complicated problems

  10. From data-taking to the plots • CMS is still in the commissioning phase • Hard work, long hours • Despite early phase and complexity of experiment • Unprecedented levels of readiness • Very encouraging first results • But: • Always problems seeking solutions • Hardest part is ahead of us

  11. Operations

  12. Integrated luminosity • Since end of March (7 TeV): • 100 nb-1 delivered (*) • 88 nb-1 recorded (~88%) L≈ 1030cm-2s-1 L≈ 1027-1029 cm-2s-1 (*) Stable beams only • ~3/4 of data recorded arrived in last 10 days • Working hard to integrate full datasets for ICHEP • Most performance plots use only fraction of data

  13. Subdetectors status Alignment/calibration status, dead/masked channels mirrored in MC

  14. “The Trigger does not determine which Physics Model is Right.Only which Physics Model is Left.”

  15. DAQ/Trigger • L1/DAQ rate: 45 kHz, @<0.5 MB/evt • High-Level Trigger: have successfully deployed online trigger menus spanning luminosities from 1E27 through 2E30 • Very smooth running throughout (200-400 Hz) • HLT CPU-performance: 49 ms/evt • Primary contributors: commissioning • and early analysis triggers • Contingency: factor of 2 • Constantly on watch list Run 138737 Overflows taken into account in the mean

  16. Trigger Performance • HLT muon efficiency wrt L1 • L1 objects matched to offline objects • ~90% efficiency at the plateau • Photon efficiency wrt offline • “super clusters” • For barrel & endcaps • Nearly 100% efficient

  17. Predicting trigger rates: MC vs. data “Building trigger menus 101”

  18. Predicting trigger rates: MC vs. data • Monte Carlo: • Only used as a cross-check at this point • Some trigger paths have significant cosmic or noise distributions that are not modeled with “baseline” MC • Still, impressive agreement overall • Using MC to cross-check 4.6E29 rates

  19. Predicting trigger rates: MC vs. data • Data: • Most triggers exhibit fairly linear behavior vs. luminosity • Extrapolation errors minimized by using most recent data to keep the rate non-linearities under control • Rates of all main players are predicted within ~20% • Using 1.2E29 rates to predict 4.6E29 rates

  20. Calibration Trigger Streams • Calibration triggers have access to full L1 rate, and they output small fraction of event • Feature unique to CMS HLT • Calibration starts online!

  21. Trigger calibration streams • Calibration triggers have access to full L1 rate, and they output small fraction of event • π0peak reconstructed offline 200 seconds into 7 TeV run 30 March 2010

  22. Trigger has accepted LHC has delivered CMS will analyze

  23. Analysis Activity 7 TeV data Routinely delivering 100k jobs per day October 09 MC Exercise Winter Break 10-20k analysis jobs running on Tier-2s continuously every day of June

  24. Physics production

  25. 3+1 CMS papers since May

  26. CMS paper at 7TeV “Transverse Momentum and Pseudorapidity Distributions of Charged Hadrons in pp Collisions at √s=7TeV”, submitted to PRL • Rise of the particle density at (2.36) 7 TeV steeper than in models • Careful tuning effort of the MC generators is ongoing

  27. Detector & Physics Performance Calorimetry JetsTracking b-taggingMuonEWK/Onia Particle Flow ElectronEWK/Onia

  28. Detector & Physics Performance Calorimetry JetsTracking b-taggingMuonEWK/Onia Particle Flow ElectronEWK/Onia

  29. Calorimetry: π0and η → γγ MC based correction applied according to cluster η and energy 1.46M of π0 → γγ PT(γ) > 0.4 GeV, PT(pair) > 1 GeV DATA MC 0.43 nb-1 1.46M π0 25.5K η → γγ PT(γ) > 0.5 GeV, PT(pair) > 2.5 GeV DATA MC 0.43 nb-1 25.5k η • Statistics refer to < 0.5 nb-1 • Very useful tool to intercalibrate the crystals • Good agreement in width and Signal/Background ratio • Masses agree with expectations to within 1%

  30. Calorimetry: Missing ET Calorimetric MET (GeV) • Jets reconstructed with the anti-kT R=0.5 algorithm • Dijet selection : Jet PΤ> 25 GeV, Δφ> 2.1, |η| < 3 • Loose ID cuts on number of components and neutral/charged energy fraction

  31. Detector & Physics Performance Calorimetry JetsTracking b-taggingMuonEWK/Onia Particle Flow ElectronEWK/Onia

  32. Calorimetric di-jet events Dijet mass Δφ(j1, j2) # of Calo Towers Fraction of EM energy in Calo-Jets

  33. Detector & Physics Performance CalorimetryJetsTracking b-taggingMuonEWK/Onia Particle Flow ElectronEWK/Onia

  34. Tracking distributions

  35. Muon distributions “Global Muons”: matched tracks from Muon system and Tracker Global Muons Global Muons • η and pT distributions dominated by light hadron decay muons (red) • good agreement with MC prediction, including • heavy flavor decays (blue) • punch-through (black) • fakes (green)

  36. Tracking distributions ηdistribution φdistribution pTspectrum

  37. Tracker Material Budget ηdistribution φdistribution

  38. Tracker Material Budget ηdistribution φdistribution pixel cluster charge

  39. Tomography

  40. Detector & Physics Performance CalorimetryJetsTrackingb-taggingMuonEWK/Onia Particle Flow ElectronEWK/Onia

  41. b-tagging 3D IP significance • 3D impact parameter value and significance • all tracks with pT> 1GeV belonging to jets with pT > 40 GeV and |η| < 1.5 - PFlowJets anti-kT R=0.5) Excellent alignment and general tracking performance

  42. b-tagging example Two b-jets candidate

  43. CMS experiment at LHC, CERN Run 136100 / Event 256858438 2010-25-5 03:43:48 CEDT B-→ J/yK- candidate

  44. CMS experiment at LHC, CERN Run 136100 / Event 256858438 2010-25-5 03:43:48 CEDT B-→ J/yK- candidate All other tracks: pT > 1.0 GeV/c

  45. Detector & Physics Performance CalorimetryJetsTrackingb-taggingMuonEWK/Onia Particle Flow ElectronEWK/Onia

  46. Particle Flow • Particle Flow: Full Event reconstruction • Topological matching between charged particle momenta measured with tracker with clusters in calorimeter • Corrects for energy loss along trajectories • Better precision, full event info • High-level object: requires holistic detector view • Excellent tracker • High E/M calorimeter granularity (0.017 × 0.017) • Strong magnetic field to separate tracks • CMS very well suited for P-Flow reconstruction

  47. Particle Flow MET

  48. Particle Flow MET Laser forgotten on Need cleaning strategies developed based on timing constraints

  49. Particle Flow MET Comparison between calorimetric and Particle-Flow MET (Minimum bias events)

  50. Detector & Physics Performance CalorimetryJetsTrackingb-taggingMuonEWK/OniaParticle Flow ElectronEWK/Onia

More Related