1 / 26

Support to the event location in CS Scanning Station

Support to the event location in CS Scanning Station. OPERA Collaboration Meeting 02/04/2009 ANKARA. Fabio Pupilli LNGS Scanning Team. Analysis types in CS Scanning Station. Two basetrack search (STANDARD) In case the event is not located: (MICRO) Compton alignment ¾ search

halen
Download Presentation

Support to the event location in CS Scanning Station

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. Support to the event locationin CS Scanning Station OPERA Collaboration Meeting 02/04/2009 ANKARA Fabio Pupilli LNGS Scanning Team

  2. Analysis types in CS Scanning Station • Two basetrack search (STANDARD) • In case the event is not located: (MICRO) • Compton alignment • ¾ search • Support to labs when the event is not localized in ECC (ON_REQUEST) • Doublet ReMapping and ¾ search after Compton alignment • Check of scan forth tracks or tracks found in brick to validate events This talk’s subject Updated to 24/03/2009

  3. LAB REQUEST - Detailed analysis procedure 40288 – Good Map 125813 – One zone corrected The offset of the “wrong” zone is corrected a posteriori averaging the nearest zone offsets • Events not located with CS predictions • ¾ search • Event display with CS candidates superimposed to TT hits • Search for rock-μ, cosmic tracks, tracks belonging to other events with Artem tool for CS candidate validation • Compton Map Alignment • The software (developed by Valeri and recently updated) compute the x-y offsets between the 2 CSd sheets in order to maximise the number of Compton electron track coincidence. The alignment is performed locally, sampling the scanned area with small zones • The size of the zones is established by the minimum number of tracks of the alignment peak; tuning this parameter we can increase the signal/noise and obtain “good” maps for CSD of (more or less) any Fog level (previously we could select only “a priori” the area-size)

  4. Compton Map - Upgrade

  5. LAB REQUEST - Detailed analysis procedure σ~ 1.1 μm • Events not located with CS predictions • ¾ search • Event display with CS candidates superimposed to TT hits • Search for rock-μ, cosmic tracks, tracks belonging to other events with Artem tool for CS candidate validation • Compton Map Alignment • New link between CS1 and CS2 • PositionTolerance = 8 μm (both for double base-tracks and 3 out of 4) [in STANDARD analysis 40 μm] • SlopeTolerance = 10 mrad (double base-track ) • SlopeTolerance = 50 mrad (3 out of 4) • MinGrainSum = 36 (double base-track ) • MinGrainSum = 30 (3 out of 4)

  6. LAB REQUEST - Detailed analysis procedure • Events not located with CS predictions • ¾ search • Event display with CS candidates superimposed to TT hits • Search for rock-μ, cosmic tracks, tracks belonging to other events with Artem tool for CS candidate validation • Compton Map Alignment • New link between CS1 and CS2 • Discard or “confirm” already validated candidates • Manual check • All new double bt are checked; a selection is applied on ¾ sample depending on the event: • QE events: only μ candidates checked (bt slope within 100 mrad wrt EleDet pred) • Other events: cuts applied in order to reduce the number of tracks to be checked to 20÷30 (for CC all μ candidates are always checked): • Cut on number of grains • Stronger Quality-Cut on the basetrack: “σ < 0.25*N -4”

  7. LAB REQUEST - Detailed analysis procedure • Events not located with CS predictions • ¾ search • Event display with CS candidates superimposed to TT hits • Search for rock-μ, cosmic tracks, tracks belonging to other events with Artem tool for CS candidate validation • Compton Map Alignment • New link between CS1 and CS2 • Discard or “confirm” already validated candidates • Manual check • Analysis of the results • Check if new candidates are tagged as comsic rays, rock-μ or track belonging to other events; TT matching of new candidates

  8. LAB REQUEST - Detailed analysis procedure • Events not located with CS predictions • ¾ search • Event display with CS candidates superimposed to TT hits • Search for rock-μ, cosmic tracks, tracks belonging to other events with Artem tool for CS candidate validation • Compton Map Alignment • New link between CS1 and CS2 • Discard or “confirm” already validated candidates • Manual check • Analysis of the results • If no new (interesting) tracks found – ReScan • Manual check of new candidates • If nothing new found, we repeat steps c,d,e,f,g of the previous analysis. We evaluate also measurement’s Data Quality and if it’s not satisfactory we can sometimes schedule another scan

  9. LAB REQUEST - Detailed analysis procedure • Events not located with CS predictions • ¾ search • “Eye” check of the event and electronic detector prediction with CS candidates superimposed • Search vetoed CS tracks (rock-μ, cosmic tracks, tracks belonging to other events) with Artem tool • Compton Map Alignment • New link between CS1 and CS2 • Discard or “confirm” already validated candidates • Manual check • Analysis of the results • If no new (interesting) tracks found – ReScan • Manual check of new candidates • If nothing new found, we repeat steps c,d,e,f,g of the previous analysis. We evaluate also measurement’s Data Quality and if it’s not satisfactory we can sometimes schedule another scan • Validation of tracks originated in the brick • Manual check of tracks found in the brick for event validation • (If not found) Search for single basetracks in the data and manual check • To be implemented: Prediction scan on CSD (3x3 views) around these tracks

  10. LAB requests arrived • 56 support requests from European Labs arrived at LNGS • None of the CS tracks connected in brick: 16 • At least one CS track connected, but event not localized: 29 • Check on Scan Forth (SF) tracks to validate the event: 8 • CS candidates “confirmation” with Compton Map: 3 Results • Still under analysis: 26 • Completed: 30 • Second brick extraction request: 4 • No new tracks / no SF tracks confirmed: 1/1 • Compton Map Confirmation: 3 • New tracks published or SF track confirmed: 21 • Feedback by LABS • 9 events localized, • 5 CSD with SF tracks confirmed • 4 event with new tracks connected

  11. Completed – 2° brick extractionEvent 228342297 (NC) - Brick 124811 STANDARD analysis: 2 CS candidates not connected in the brick

  12. Completed – 2° brick extractionEvent 228342297 (NC) - Brick 124811 • ON_REQUEST analysis: • ComptonMap confirms only one of the candidates previously validated (but marginal in X, projection on pl57 @ ~ 800 μm from the edge) • No new tracks found Requested extraction of adjacent brick in X (124810)

  13. Completed – Event locatedEvent 236493825 (CC) - Brick 100127 STANDARD analysis: 3 CS candidates not connected in the brick

  14. Completed – Event locatedEvent 236493825 (CC) - Brick 100127 • ON_REQUEST analysis: • ComptonMap discards one candidate (ID = 1) and confirms other candidates • A mu candidate (ID 3) recovered in ¾ sample Event located, track 3 is the muon

  15. Completed after a two step analysis – Event locatedEvent 236468617 (CC) - Brick 49848 STANDARD analysis: 2 CS candidates connected in the brick, but uncorrelated

  16. Completed after a two step analysis – Event locatedEvent 236468617 (CC) - Brick 49848 1° Step • ON_REQUEST analysis: • ComptonMap confirms all candidates previously validated • Found 5 new candidates in ¾ sample New candidates connected, but not sufficient to reach primary vertex

  17. Completed after a two step analysis – Event locatedEvent 236468617 (CC) - Brick 49848 2° Step ON_REQUEST analysis (ReScan): Found a new track (ID1,green) New candidate connected, event located

  18. Completed – Event locatedEvent 227165825 (CC) - Brick 119237 STANDARD analysis: No double bt found in CSd MICRO analysis: one CS candidate found but not connected in the brick

  19. Completed – Event locatedEvent 227165825 (CC) - Brick 119237 Since the only track validated on CS came from a ¾ analysis, the first step of ON_REQUEST analysis was a ReScan and… Surprise! Found 6 confirmed double bt (including a mu candidate, ID 2) from ReScan

  20. Completed – Event locatedEvent 227165825 (CC) - Brick 119237 It’s difficult to explain a null result on first scanning, when the second scanning has measured 6 double bt (5 in the previously scanned area), only by scanning inefficiency. But take a look at first scanning’s Compton Map: Large offsets, in most zones more than 40 μm Marks measurement error? Why after Compton alignment we cannot recover tracks?

  21. Completed – Event locatedEvent 227165825 (CC) - Brick 119237 The explanation… We tried to search in scanning data of the first scanning for single basetracks or double basetracks (enalrging position tolerance), compatible with tracks found on second scanning • Tracks 2,7,8 found as single bt • Tracks 5,6 found as double bt but with large offsets (not linked after Compton alignment because they are at the border between two zones with different offsets)

  22. Completed – Event locatedEvent 227165825 (CC) - Brick 119237 All tracks have been connected in the brick Event located, track 2 is the muon

  23. CS candidate tagged – Under AnalysisEvent 236468617 (CC) - Brick 56705 STANDARD analysis: 1 CS candidate not connected in the brick

  24. CS candidate tagged – Under AnalysisEvent 236468617 (CC) - Brick 56705 Using Artem tool, we realized that this track is a rock-μ

  25. Compton Map “confirmation” Event 217981425 (CC) - Brick 21379 Mu candidate and 2 other candidates found in STANDARD analysis but not connected • Tracks are not tagged by Artem tool • ComptonMap confirms all candidates • Checked also 5th mark to confirm CS-brick correlation

  26. Conclusions • Support activity to Lab requests in LNGS Scanning Station is on going with good results • The activities have been slowed down in the last two months to concentrate efforts in localizing pending events • The time dedicated to each request is affected by the heavy load of manual checks required especially for ¾ analysis, which should be reduced with some dedicated software • Hope to send other good news to European Labs in next weeks…

More Related