1 / 16

Track quality - impact on hardware of different strategies

Track quality - impact on hardware of different strategies. Performances on WH and Bs  mm Now we use all the layers in the fit and we suffer – can we drop something going to raw hits? Refresh about the FTK architecture Impact on hardware due to different configurations.

micol
Télécharger la présentation

Track quality - impact on hardware of different strategies

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. Track quality - impact on hardware of different strategies • Performances on WH and Bs mm • Now we use all the layers in the fit and we suffer– can we drop something going to raw hits? • Refresh about the FTK architecture • Impact on hardware due to different configurations Paola FTK meeting 21-02-2007

  2. Truth FTK iPat iPat V10

  3. Fakes Bsmm 10% 5/6 tracks 2 pixel layers 5/6 tracks 3 pixel layers Good Bsmm 89%

  4. Bs->mm fake analisys - cuts C phi Distance from the nearest truth. Log scale. z0 ctheta Asym in ctheta distance. To be investigated. Francesco Crescioli

  5. No miss No miss Miss Pix0 Miss Pix0 Miss Pix2 Miss Pix2 Miss Sct0 Miss Sct0 Miss Sct1 Miss Sct1 Miss Sct2 Miss Sct2 Miss Sct3 Miss Sct3 3 pixel layers + 3 SCT Space points 2 pixel layers + 4 SCT Space points

  6. Were is the problem? Francesco can you run your classificationfake/good on WH samples, or give to Monica the tool? It could be “higher fraction of Fakes” • Is it in FTK or is it a more general problem? What happens if FTK and iPatRec use exactly the same detector? NO TRT, all the 7 available space points for both. • Is it the new software release that has problems? • Can a complex b-tag algorithm recover some performances? How today-iPatRec b-tag performance compare with the past? • If the problem is the poor detector performance (problem seen both by iPatRec & FTK), difficult to use only 6 layers in FTK dropping redundance: is it a pattern recognition problem or a fit problem? • Just a fit problem: we can use 11 layers in the fit and 6 layers in the AM • General problem: may be we need to use 11 layers in the whole system since the prototype beginning.

  7. R-f+stereo: 2 SCT layers/bus AM 6 buses Each one Can provide 2 layers 1 core crate/partition HARDWARE ARCHITECTURE Size of overlap regions as function of Pt threshold

  8. ~75 9U VME boards – 4 types Pixels & SCT PIPELINEDAM overlap regions EVENT # 1 RODs EVENT # N NEW 50~100 KHz event rate HITS (LVDS links) AM-board Data Formatter (DF) DO-board S-links SUPER BINS DATA ORGANIZER ROADS cluster finding? split by layer ROADS + HITS 2nd step: clean-up & track fitting RW-HW Track Fitter ~Offline quality Track parameters Raw data ROBs Track data ROB

  9. AM-B0 AM-B7 AM-B8 AM-B2 AM-B3 AM-B4 AM-B5 AM-B6 AM-B1 CPU0 CPU2 CPU3 CPU1 Ghost Buster DO0 DO2 DO3 DO5 DO4 DO1 CORE system SIZE 1 crate for Each f sector O(2.5 M) patterns 1 Gigafitter 128 AMChips /board = 320 kpat/board Using 12 layers 640 kpat/board Using 6 layers NOW in FTKsim SS size (too large? Check timing!): Pix: 5mmx z_Mod Sct:10mmx z_Mod ~1 Mpat for 90 degree sector: 4x2 AMB for 12 layers 2 AMB for 6 layers 180 degree sector: CUSTOM BACKPLANE FTK INPUT FROM Data Formats 8x2 AMB for 12 layers 4 AMB for 6 layers

  10. 6 modules each z 90o DATA FORMATTERs 8 sectors option Barrel f Pixel end caps x3 wheels SCT end caps x3 wheels

  11. S-links To DOs DATA FORMATTER S-links Overlap region Receive S-links Find Clusters Divide by Layers Send Hits to DOs Sends overlap region to near phi-sector DATA FORMATTER LVDS Serializer/ Deserializer P3

  12. RODs and DFs if RO by wedge 180 degree sectors

  13. RODs and DFs if RO by wedge 45 degree sectors If we have 8 sectors some DF needs to send data to 2 different DOs. This is feasible for DF with few outputs (Pix0, Pix1-2, Pix disks?). It can be done for SC0-3 and SC disks too if stereo layers are not used or sent to the same DO. The fall back solution is to increase the number of DFs up to nearest multiple of 8.

  14. SLINKS LVDS LINKs RODs AM-B0 AM-B0 AM-B2 AM-B2 AM-B3 AM-B3 AM-B4 AM-B4 AM-B5 AM-B5 AM-B7 AM-B7 AM-B8 AM-B8 AM-B6 AM-B6 AM-B1 AM-B1 DF CPU0 CPU0 CPU2 CPU2 CPU3 CPU3 CPU1 CPU1 To DOs Ghost Buster Ghost Buster DF DF DO0 DO0 DO2 DO2 DO3 DO3 DO5 DO5 DO4 DO4 DO1 DO1 The Old IDEAs: 2 phi sectors >16 AMB for 12 layers: too much Overlap

  15. Let’s try to work with 4 sectors. First of all try to see if a BANK with 11 LAYERS is REASONABLE. We expect a factor 2 AM size • 4 core crates, each one containing: • > 10 AMBoards • 6 Dos • 1-4 boards for RW-HW-Track fitting • DFs # ~ 36 independent on sector # •  ~ 2 crates. TOTAL 6 crates • If we would • Use 2 track • Segments: • If 2 f sectors • 4+2 crates If 4 f sectors • 8 + 2 crates But worse performances AM

  16. Conclusions • First of all understand well the problems in track reconstruction quality. Repeat Francesco analysis of WH sample and see if a good b-tagging algorithm can make the difference • However I suspect that going to raw hits we cannot use less than 11 layers at least in the fit (differently from what we were planning for the first prototype) ! • Let’s try to use a 11 layer for pattern recognition and fit: • Let’s see how much big is the bank (we expect x 2) • Let’s see the performance of the system (road size and processing time also!) • If we find problems with an 11 layer AM bank : • Use 6 layers in AM and 11 layers in fit procedure • Or see if we can split into 2 track segments.

More Related