1 / 32

Validation of Bertini and CHIPS

Validation of Bertini and CHIPS. Outline. Models tested Compared to dataset Outlook. Sunanda Banerjee. November 30, 2009. Models Tested. Seven versions of Bertini cascade code are tried As in 9.3.beta01 Two tags from Dennis ( V09-02-05 and V09-02-08 )

talia
Télécharger la présentation

Validation of Bertini and CHIPS

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. Validation of Bertini and CHIPS Outline • Models tested • Compared to dataset • Outlook Sunanda Banerjee November 30, 2009

  2. Models Tested • Seven versions of Bertini cascade code are tried • As in 9.3.beta01 • Two tags from Dennis (V09-02-05 and V09-02-08) • As in 9.2.ref09 with additional changes (formation time) • As in 9.2.ref10 with trailing effect incorporated for Bertini code • Tag V09-02-10 which is supposed to be in the release • As in 9.3.cand02 • Two versions of CHIPS code • As in 9.2.ref10 + extra tag from Mikhail (V09-02-21) • As in 9.3.cand02

  3. Data Used Look at several kinematic distributions from 5.0 GeV/c π+, π--induced interactions and 7.5/14.6 GeV/c p-induced interactions on a variety of nuclear targets For calculation of invariant cross sections in ITEP data, constant bin width of ±4° is used and in BNL data constant bin width of (Δy = ±0.1) is used. Also used CMS test beam data from 2006 H2 beam line data for mean response, resolution, MIP fraction In addition look at the energy evolution of mean multiplicity and total KE fraction of different particles for the physics lists QGSP_BERT and CHIPS

  4. π+ + C → p + X at 5.0 GeV/c 119.0° 59.1°

  5. p + C → p + X 1.4 GeV/c 7.5 GeV/c 59.1° 119.0°

  6. p + U → p + X 1.4 GeV/c 7.5 GeV/c 59.1° 119.0°

  7. π- + A → n + X at 5 GeV/c (θ = 119°) Cu Pb

  8. Mean Multiplicity • Energy dependence is smoother in CHIPS for all particles

  9. Mean Total KE Fraction • Energy dependence of total KE fraction is also smoother for CHIPS

  10. Mean Response ECAL+HCAL HCAL Only Mean energy response worse for CHIPS at low energies

  11. Energy Resolution HCAL Only ECAL+HCAL CHIPS predicts much better resolution at low energies

  12. MIP Fraction (π‾)

  13. π- + A → p + X at 5 GeV/c (θ = 59.1°) Cu C Pb U

  14. p + C → p + X 1.4 GeV/c 7.5 GeV/c 59.1° 119.0°

  15. p + U → p + X 1.4 GeV/c 7.5 GeV/c 59.1° 119.0°

  16. π+ + C/U → n + X at θ = 119° 1.4 GeV/c 5.0 GeV/c C U

  17. p + A → π+ + X at 14.6 GeV/c y=1.1 y=2.3 Be Au

  18. p + Cu → K+ + X at 14.6 GeV/c y=1.1 y=1.5 y=1.9

  19. Mean Response (ECAL+HCAL) Mean energy response best for _EMV(EML) and better in the new version.

  20. Mean Response (HCAL only)

  21. Energy Resolution (ECAL+HCAL)

  22. MIP Fraction (π‾)

  23. Observations • There is no significant changes in the prediction of Bertini cascade model for inclusive p/n cross sections in π±-induced interactions in V09-02-10 or Cand02 from the reference tags V09-02-05 or V09-02-08. • Predictions forCHIPSis not as good for inclusive n/p cross sections in the intermediate energies. • Predictions of Bertini cascade model with changes due to formation time has some interesting and significant changes. • Energy dependence is smoother for CHIPS than QGSP_BERT physics list. • Agreement for mean energy response and for MIP fraction in π‾for CMS test beam data is better in the two recent versions of Bertini.

  24. BACKUP SLIDES

  25. π+ + C → p + X 5.0 GeV/c 1.4 GeV/c 59.1° 119.0°

  26. π+ + U → p + X 1.4 GeV/c 5.0 GeV/c 59.1° 119.0°

  27. π- + A → n + X at 5 GeV/c (θ = 119°) C Cu U Pb

  28. p + C/U → n + X at θ = 119° 1.4 GeV/c 7.5 GeV/c C U

  29. p + A → π-+ X at 14.6 GeV/c y=1.1 y=2.3 Be Au

  30. p + Cu → K- + X at 14.6 GeV/c y=1.5 y=1.1 y=1.9

  31. p + Cu → p + X at 14.6 GeV/c y=1.1 y=1.5 y=1.9 y=2.3

  32. Energy Resolution (ECAL+HCAL)

More Related