Validation of dc3 fully simulated w e samples nlo reconstructed in 11 0 42
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 40

Validation of DC3 fully simulated W → e ν samples (NLO, reconstructed in 11.0.42) PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 46 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Validation of DC3 fully simulated W → e ν samples (NLO, reconstructed in 11.0.42). Laura Gilbert 01/08/06. W → e ν from [email protected], full sim. Original sample submitted for generation in December, some of the one million W → e - ν now fully simulated on the grid, in batches of 10k events.

Download Presentation

Validation of DC3 fully simulated W → e ν samples (NLO, reconstructed in 11.0.42)

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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Validation of dc3 fully simulated w e samples nlo reconstructed in 11 0 42

Validation of DC3 fully simulated W→eν samples (NLO, reconstructed in 11.0.42)

Laura Gilbert 01/08/06


W e from mc@nlo full sim

W→eνfrom [email protected], full sim

  • Original sample submitted for generation in December, some of the one million W→e-ν now fully simulated on the grid, in batches of 10k events.

  • 47800 events available (using CBNTs)

  • Lepton generator level filter efficiency (10Gev, |η|<2.7) was ~63.3%

  • Generated cross section is 8.4nb (cf. 30nb for W→l-ν: TDR). Luminosity for 10k events is 1.9pb-1.

  • Cuts applied at any stage are listed on top right of slide.

  • ALL truth plots are normalised to weighting of simulated data EXCEPT multiplicity plots.


Electrons

ELECTRONS

Sanity plots: multiplicity

- truth

- full sim


Electron selection cuts

Electron Selection Cuts

  • At least one electron with transverse energy > 25GeV. (Use ET rather than pT since brem recovery not properly implemented yet0

  • Electron candidate has at least one associated track matched (exclude photons)

  • η < 2.4. This cuts out dubious candidates at the end of the electromagnetic calorimeter.

  • IsEM flag = 0, electron isolation cut. This should now be tuned correctly but I need to look into the bitwise cuts in more detail to check.


Electrons1

Cuts:

  • ET(ele) > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • η(ele) < 2.4

ELECTRONS

Sanity plots: multiplicity of electrons that pass selection cuts

- truth

- full sim

Almost always only one electron candidate per event passes cuts.


Electrons2

ELECTRONS

Checking cuts with truth info:

Cuts:

  • ET(ele) > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • η(ele) < 2.4

Initially tracks of candiadates entered into egamma container include kaons, pions, muons. After cuts only electrons remain.

- before cuts

- after cuts


Electrons3

Cuts:

  • ET(ele) > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • η(ele) < 2.4

ELECTRONS

Sanity plots: phi

- truth

- full sim


Electrons4

Cuts:

  • ET(ele) > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • η(ele) < 2.4

ELECTRONS

Sanity plots: eta

- truth

- full sim


Electrons5

Cuts:

  • ET(ele) > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • η(ele) < 2.4

ELECTRONS

Identifying electrons with their partner in truth containers, matching (η,φ) space:

If (ΔR<0.1) match is found


Electrons6

Cuts:

  • ET(ele) > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • η(ele) < 2.4

ELECTRONS

Sanity plots: ET

- truth

- full sim


Electrons7

Cuts:

  • ET(ele) > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • η(ele) < 2.4

ELECTRONS

Difference between simulated and truth ET distributions:

PROBLEM?

No overall difference between simulated and truth ET shapes!


Electrons8

Cuts:

  • ET(ele) > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • η(ele) < 2.4

  • ΔR<0.1 (matching sim to truth)

ELECTRONS

Electron ET resolution: (sim-truth)/truth for matched sim:truth electron pairs.

Resolution looks roughly ok though…


Electrons9

Cuts:

  • ET(ele) > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • η(ele) < 2.4

ELECTRONS

"Wrong sign" electrons found from associated track q/p, AFTER cuts:

Wrong sign

Correct sign

*PROBLEM*


Electrons10

Cuts:

  • ET(ele) > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • η(ele) < 2.4

ELECTRONS

ET distribution of "wrong sign" electron candidates:

- +ve charge electrons (from track q/p)

- all electron candidates (for shape comparison)


Electrons11

Cuts:

  • ET (ele truth) > 25GeV

ELECTRONS

Consider truth information: just cut on ET > 25GeV

There are positrons present in egamma truth, but none pass ET cut.

- before cuts

- after cuts


Electrons12

ELECTRONS

  • What are the wrong sign electrons?

    • Not generated positrons

    • Don't have high pT tracks, so probably not electrons mis-reconstructed.

    • Possibly wrong track-cluster combinations. Needs further investigation.


Electron issues

Cuts:

  • ET(ele) > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • η(ele) < 2.4

ELECTRON ISSUES

  • Further investigation needed:

  • E over p always 0! → needs to be fixed in future.

  • Where do the "positrons" come from?

  • Need to look into IsEM flags in detail.


Electron jets

ELECTRON JETS

W Transverse mass plots look fishy if I apply exclusions on events containing jets with ET>30GeV.

Therefore many jets come from electrons.

Identify and exclude these electron jets.

Can only be one on jets with η<2.5 to make electron matching possible.

(Jets reconstructed using cone algorithm with R<0.7, see later)


Electron jets1

Cuts:

  • ET(ele) > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • Jet η < 2.5

ELECTRON JETS

Matching electrons and jets in (η,φ) space:

- truth

- full sim

Log scale→

Identify jets with electrons if ΔR<0.7


Electron jets2

Cuts:

  • ET(ele) > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • Jet η < 2.4

ELECTRON JETS

Matching electrons and jets in energy:

Trying to match energy as well as (η,φ) distribution (no cut made):

Jets are corrected to have more energy than electron candidates so -ve values more likely to be a match.

- truth

- full sim


Electron jets3

Cuts:

  • ET(ele) > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • Jet η < 2.4

ELECTRON JETS

A closer look at electron-jet ΔR and energy distributions: simulation

Smattering of events here


Electron jets4

Cuts:

  • ET(ele) > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • Jet η < 2.4

ELECTRON JETS

A closer look at electron-jet ΔR and energy distributions: truth

no events here


Electron jets5

Cuts:

  • ET(ele) > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • Jet η < 2.4

ELECTRON JETS

A closer look at electron-jet ΔR and energy distributions: (truth - simulation)

Truth - simulated

This is the normalised difference of the last two plots!

Energy difference (MeV)

ΔR


Validation of dc3 fully simulated w e samples nlo reconstructed in 11 0 42

Cuts:

  • ΔR (e-jet) > 0.7

  • Jet η < 2.4

JETS

  • Looking at all jets which have not been matched with electrons: ie. Jets which are isolated from electron candidates by at least 0.7 in (η,φ).

  • Still looking at jets with η<2.4 for accurate electron matching.

  • There are three available clustering algorithms:

    • Kt alorithm: apparently unsuitable for low pT jets.

    • Cone algorithm with R<0.4. Discounted as produces very low statistics (few jets reconstructed)

    • Cone algorithm with R<0.7. Use this.


Validation of dc3 fully simulated w e samples nlo reconstructed in 11 0 42

JETS

Sanity plots: multiplicity before any selection:

- truth

- full sim


Validation of dc3 fully simulated w e samples nlo reconstructed in 11 0 42

Cuts:

  • ΔR (e-jet) > 0.7

  • Jet η < 2.4

JETS

Sanity plots: multiplicity after electron/jet matches removed, jet η<2.4

- truth

- full sim

Log scale→

Multiplicity greatly reduced


Validation of dc3 fully simulated w e samples nlo reconstructed in 11 0 42

Cuts:

  • ΔR (e-jet) > 0.7

  • Jet η < 2.4

JETS

Sanity plots: phi

- truth

- full sim


Validation of dc3 fully simulated w e samples nlo reconstructed in 11 0 42

Cuts:

  • ΔR (e-jet) > 0.7

  • Jet η < 2.4

JETS

Sanity plots: eta

- truth

- full sim

Shape before η cut


Validation of dc3 fully simulated w e samples nlo reconstructed in 11 0 42

Cuts:

  • ΔR (e-jet) > 0.7

  • Jet η < 2.4

  • ΔR(jet-truth)<0.5

JETS

Matching jets with truth in (η,φ) space:

Log scale→

If (ΔR<0.5) match is found


Validation of dc3 fully simulated w e samples nlo reconstructed in 11 0 42

Cuts:

  • ΔR (e-jet) > 0.7

  • Jet η < 2.4

JETS

Sanity plots: ET

- truth

- full sim

Jets not reconstructed < 10GeV


Validation of dc3 fully simulated w e samples nlo reconstructed in 11 0 42

Cuts:

  • ΔR (e-jet) > 0.7

  • Jet η < 2.4

  • ΔR(jet-truth)<0.5

JETS

ET resolution: (sim-truth)/truth


Validation of dc3 fully simulated w e samples nlo reconstructed in 11 0 42

Cuts:

  • ΔR (e-jet) > 0.7

  • Jet η < 2.4

JETS

Sanity plots: Energy

- truth

- full sim


Validation of dc3 fully simulated w e samples nlo reconstructed in 11 0 42

Cuts:

  • ΔR (e-jet) > 0.7

  • Jet η < 2.4

  • ΔR(jet-truth)<0.5

JETS

Energy resolution: (sim-truth)/truth


Validation of dc3 fully simulated w e samples nlo reconstructed in 11 0 42

Cuts:

  • ΔR (e-jet) > 0.7

  • Jet η < 2.4

JETS

Sanity plots: ET

- truth

- full sim

Strange: data is shifted down from truth.


Jet issues

JET ISSUES

  • Jets from electrons are easily identified and removed by an exclusion cut in (η,φ) space.

  • Not certain this is the best algorithm, but other available algorithms have more problems.

  • Jet statistics low after removal of electrons, therefore resolutions not well defined.

  • Meaning of jet “mass” not well understood, left-shift of simulation w.r.t. truth unexpected.


Missing energy

Cuts:

  • Ptele > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • Electron η < 2.4

  • Jet η < 2.4

  • ΔR (e-jet) > 0.7

  • MET>25GeV

MISSING ENERGY

Sanity plots: Missing ET

Probably not properly calibrated

- truth: calculated from non-interacting particles

- full sim: corrected, inc. muons

Cut on MET>25GeV


Missing energy1

Cuts:

  • Ptele > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • Electron η < 2.4

  • Jet η < 2.4

  • ΔR (e-jet) > 0.7

  • MET>25GeV

MISSING ENERGY

Missing ET Resolution:

Asymmetry reflecting right-shift of data w.r.t. truth


Missing energy2

Cuts:

  • Ptele > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • Electron η < 2.4

  • Jet η < 2.4

  • ΔR (e-jet) > 0.7

  • MET>25GeV

MISSING ENERGY

Missing ET φ distribution:

- truth

- full sim


W reconstruction

Cuts:

  • Ptele > 25GeV

  • At least one track matched

  • IsEM=0

  • Electron η < 2.4

  • Jet η < 2.4

  • ΔR (e-jet) > 0.7

  • MET>25GeV

W RECONSTRUCTION

W transverse mass reconstructed from Missing ET and highest ET electron:

- truth

- full sim


Conclusions

Conclusions:

  • The W looks like TDR (right)!

  • Electrons are well reconstructed.

  • The e/p variable in the egamma container should probably be fixed.

  • Electrons with mis-identified charge not yet understood.

  • Missing energy doesn’t seem best corrected to match truth.

  • Insufficient stats for decent jet resolution.

  • Jet “mass” shift seems strange.


  • Login