40 likes | 186 Vues
B-Physics Trigger in the TDR. Demonstrate viable & affordable B-physics trigger based on the evaluation of two strategies: 1) Di-muon trigger at L=2x10 33 , introducing full scan at lower luminosity 2) RoI guided B-trigger, possibly with addition of full-scan at lower luminosity
E N D
B-Physics Trigger in the TDR • Demonstrate viable & affordable B-physics trigger based on the evaluation of two strategies: • 1) Di-muon trigger at L=2x1033, introducing full scan at lower luminosity • 2) RoI guided B-trigger, possibly with addition of full-scan at lower luminosity • Define 2 as baseline???? • To do this need measurements of: • Efficiency for signal channels • Rate • c.p.u resource estimate based on test-bed measurements for whole chain.
Status of di-muon & full-scan triggers 1) Di-muon trigger at L=2x10^33, introducing full scan at lower luminosity • Current Status: • Full-scan based strategy studied in detail using fully-simulated events and appropriate LVL2 and EF algorithms and documented in TP back-up document: ATL-DAQ-2000-031 • Robustness of selection w.r.t. ID misalignment studied & documented in: ATL-DAQ-2001-006 • EF selections documented: • Rejection of rate at EF for J/Y, Ds and B0d->pp channels. (Moscow) ATL-DAQ-2000-017 • Event Filter Rate for the Ds Trigger (Innsbruck) ATL-DAQ-2001-003 • Impact of only having 2 pixel layers at start-up studied using IDscan LVL2 algorithm • Estimates exist for LVL1 di-muon rates and EF rates after J/Y(m,m) and B->mmX trigger selections • Required c.p.u. resources have been estimated based on measured rates and executions times and documented in: ATL-COM-DAQ-2002-013 • Algorithms : • LVL2: mFast (barrel only), Pixel-scan+sctKalman, IDscan, TRT-LUT, xKalmanTRT • EF: xKalman, muon-? (for resource calculations assume mFast re-run at EF)
Benchmarking & Resource Estimates Preliminary paper model results (April 2002): Final Farm size Difference ~25 c.p.u Min. size incl. B-physics Min. Farm size needed at startup LVL2 • Note: • Based on custom-LVL2 algorithms, light-weight EDM, excludes data access overheads • Most B-trigger resources required for LVL2 full-scan • In order to save cpu resources, estimate does not include TRT at LVL2: • => No J/psi(e,e) trigger • EF • Resources required at EF small compared with LVL2 (~few cpu) assuming: • xKalman starting with pixels and guided by Level-2 RoI • neglecting resources needed for muon reconstruction at EF • Current offline muon algorithms too costly in cpu : • => Only includes muons at LVL2 reconstructed by mFast B-trigger resource estimate: ATL-COM-DAQ-2002-013
Using Calorimeter RoI to guide B-physics Triggers • Preliminary studies of using low ET RoI to define regions to search ID at LVL2(Alan Watson) • Uses fast simulation : • ATLFAST + parameterised calorimeter simulation • Initial results encouraging,see Alan Watson’s talk:http://www.ep.ph.bham.ac.uk/user/atw/bmeet/B-roi-feb02.ppt • EM RoI ET>2 :for J/y(ee) and muon-electron triggers • Mean Multiplicity = 1.1 (B->mX , m pT > 6 GeV) • Effic. to tag both e in J/y(e,e) : 80% (e pT >3 GeV) • Jet RoI (0.8 x 0.8 cluster) ET>5 :for B(pp) and Ds(fp) • Mean Multiplicity = 1.7 (B->mX, m pT > 6 GeV) • Efficiency • B p p • pTp> 4 GeV • RoI ET> 5 GeV • B Dsf • pT Ds, f> 1 GeV • RoI ET> 5 GeV • LVL2 reconstruction inside RoI • potential to save ~factor 10 in execution time c.f. full-scan • but with lower efficiency Actual efficiencies and cpu savings depend on thresholds & multiplicities => need full simulation