1 / 15

Stato dell’analisi del Test Beam

This report presents the analysis of the test beam data, including new results from PSI and preliminary findings from Aug2002 X5, covering topics such as dead time, fake clusters, hip rate, and baseline recovery. This study provides valuable insights into the efficiency and accuracy of the test beam setup.

oprice
Télécharger la présentation

Stato dell’analisi del Test Beam

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. Stato dell’analisi del Test Beam • Nuovi risultati al PSI • Dead time (Domenico e Nicola) • Fake clusters (Jacopo) • Risultati preliminari ad X5 • Hip rate (Simone) • Baseline recovery (Jacopo) Consorzio 11 Ottobre 2002

  2. Domenico e Nicola: dead time • Nuovo algoritmo combinatoriale per trovare le tracce • maggiore statistica • efficienza ~1 Confidence region for the 1st track Confidence region for the 2nd track

  3. Track statistics CMmedian<-30 How many tracks are found in the spill? How many tracks are found for each frame? Entries 2877

  4. hipped apv good apv Track samples CMmedian<-30 number of tracks if a cluster is found near the expected hit total number of tracks in the sample

  5. APV efficiency: CM<30 CM subtraction on 16 strips CM subtraction on 128 strips e e 5 out of only 6 events 5 out of only 6 events It looks better!

  6. CM subtraction methods CM subtraction on 16 strips (without the first and the last two) CM subtraction on 128 strips (CMmedian) Raw data-Pedestal

  7. APV eff. for each Rinv: CM30 CM subtraction on 16 strips CM subtraction on 128 strips Hipped APV eff. in mod. with Rinv =50 Ohm is better!

  8. Inefficienza Inefficienza media nei 750 ns dopo la hip I risultati di Bari indicano una inefficienza maggiore di un fattore 2 circa rispetto a quanto trovato da Pisa

  9. Jacopo: fake clusters… • Clusterizer • Three cuts : seed, neighbours, cluster charge • Absolute cuts (in ADC counts) • Studies • CM < -30,-90 to search HIPS • Different topologies of CM calculation (128,64,32,16,8) • Different cuts on clusters NHipped / NnoHipped • Plotted Quantity NHipped number of clusters found on Hipped chip while it’s recovering NnoHipped number of clusters found on chip in front of the Hipped one (same column of APVs)

  10. …vs hip cut

  11. …vs clusterization cuts

  12. Simone P. - Aug2002 X5 Multi-mode acquisition of Aug2002 X5 tests: single frame, with 10 consecutive triggers. counter (75 ns spacing) first trigger 1 2 3 4 ... 10 hip found 1 frame N. 0 9 run60519 --> Dec. Inv.OFF multi-mode (117files, 1.878.433 evts) run60525 --> Peak Inv.OFF single-mode (1 file, 15.601 evts) run60526 --> Peak Inv.OFF multi-mode (4 files, 48.147 evts) run60527 --> Peak Inv.OFF multi-mode (60 files, 881.956 evts) run60537 --> Dec. Inv.ON single-mode (17 files, 257.929 evts) run60538 --> Dec. Inv.ON multi-mode (66 files, 1.000.468 evts) At PSI main running mode was Peak Inv. ON: difficult to make comparisons!

  13. First results • run 60537: single-mode, Dec., Inv. ON 258000 evnts, with mean cluster multiplicity ~ 2 • Events with CM < -60: • apv0 apv1 apv2 apv3 total • module 4 435 234 37 103 809 • module 5 457 236 158 95 946 • module 6 520 292 158 109 1079 • module 7 508 238 147 112 1005 • module 8 486 241 156 138 1021 • Average hip (CM<-60) rate ~ 1.8 x 10-3 • Good agreement with PSI (Peak, Inv ON) = (1.5 ± 0.3)x10-3

  14. Jacopo: baseline recovery HIP cut: CM < -90 • Each frame correspond to 75 ns • Deco, Inv ON, has a slower recovery than at PSI • Opposite to what expected from “offline” deconvolution ! • Much faster without the inverter Aug2002 X5 550 ns instead of 400 ns

  15. Conclusioni • Analisi del PSI test “quasi finale” • Rinv = 50 Ohm ha una inefficienza minore (e un rate minore…) • Calcolo del CM su < 16 strips migliora l’efficienza e diminuisce i fake clusters • Risultati MOLTO preliminari di Aug2002 X5: • Hip rate trovato al PSI confermato anche per pioni di 120 GeV (come aspettato) • La baseline in deconvoluzione recupera piu’ lentamente • Difficile fare uno studio di efficienza perche’ il trigger rate sembra essere troppo basso… non ci sono tracce nei frames successivi al primo trigger…

More Related