Troubleshooting Kalman Package Integration for MC Simulations
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Progress on MC simulations Problems or regress…
Kalman or reconstrucion… • I looked into the “Kalman” package;SetupKalmanRec.cc in $MICE/Recon/SciFi/src/SetupKalman.cc • I noticed… + The Kalman is not integrated with G4MICE+ Detector description is independent; Tracker 1/2, TOF 1/2/3 - The tracker volume is hard-coded as cylinder (r=50cm, z=150cm) - Tracker volume material need to be defined in Kalman as well (I didn’t) - The default radiation length of the tracker volume is hard-coded as helium! => hardly see any difference between vacuum/helium/air…+ Magnetic field is independent; Bz is constant “SciFiTrackerBField” (4.0097T) - Bx and By is zero, unless defined by separate files (I didn’t use them) - It seems there is no matching coil implemented+ At the first look it is not clear to me if de/dx is (correctly) used or not • That means;- DO NOT TRUST MY PREVIOUS RESULTS!!! on vacuum/helium/air…- misalignment study is very hard; You cannot just change the geometry in G4MICE Simulation, changes needed for Kalman as well. Also you can not use tilted B field map possibly generated by G4MICE Simulation…
Geometry… • In the previous analysis;The region filled by gas is1400mm in G4MICE and 1500mm in Kalman (spectrometer coil region)=> Need to extend the volume to reflect likely position of the window • Reminder; we need to implement a new window both in G4MICE Simulation and Kalman to check tracker performance http://www.physics.ox.ac.uk/design/MICE/MICE-trackermodule/MICE-TM-GA0000-R05.pdf
Performance estimation by hand • The worst case…, the window is at the end of solenoid module:=> thickness of gas from tracker end to window will be about 2.4m • The best case…, the window is close to the tracker end: => thickness ~1.3m • For 200MeV/c muon qplane(rms) rad. yplane (rms) m x/ X0 • He gas; 7.9e-4 6.0e-4 2.29e-4 (x=1.3m) • Air; 4.0e-3 3.0e-3 4.28e-3 (x=1.3m) • He gas; 1.1e-3 1.5e-3 4.23e-4 (x=2.4m) • Air; 5.6e-3 7.7e-3 7.89e-3 (x=2.4m) • A station; 4.1e-3 4.5e-6 4.5e-3 (x=1.9mm) • Filling by air is close tohave another inactive stationor worse. • I would recommend to usehelium which have less than10% of x/X0 compared toa station
Summary • I would recommend to use helium gas instead of air from my calculations.(sorry for not based on simulation study…) • Hopefully, redo the analysis by collaboration meeting…Vacuum/helium/air with proper configuration as well as simulation with no MCS by disabling it in Geant4