The CLEO CsI Calorimeter - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

The cleo csi calorimeter l.jpg
Download
1 / 22

The CLEO CsI Calorimeter 15 Years of Physics with Photons h c ( 1 P 1 charmonium) Discovery M(  c ) (GeV)  c Inclusive  c reconstructed M(  0 -recoil) (2S) 0 h c  0 ( c ) >5.5  significance M(h c )=3524.4 0.60.4 MeV (consistent w/spin-wtd  cJ avg) Requirements

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

Download Presentation

The CLEO CsI Calorimeter

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


The cleo csi calorimeter l.jpg

The CLEO CsI Calorimeter

15 Years of Physics with Photons

CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


H c 1 p 1 charmonium discovery l.jpg

hc (1P1 charmonium) Discovery

M(c) (GeV)

cInclusive

c reconstructed

M(0-recoil)

(2S)0 hc0(c)

>5.5 significance

M(hc)=3524.40.60.4 MeV

(consistent w/spin-wtd cJ avg)

CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


Requirements l.jpg

Requirements

  • Early 80’s detector landscape

    • Good tracking + poor calorimetry

      • Mark III, CLEO I, Argus

    • Poor tracking + good calorimetry

      • Crystal Ball, CUSB

  • CLEO II: have both!

    • EMCal must fit outside ~1m radius tracking chamber

    • Magnet coil outside EMCal, so EMCal must be compact, work inside B-field

CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


Csi tl properties l.jpg

CsI(Tl) Properties

Light Output

E/E (%)

CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


Hermetic coverage l.jpg

Hermetic Coverage

CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


Cleo iii c layout l.jpg

CLEO III/c Layout

48 rings, 128 per ring

RICH

820/endcap

Drift Chamber

7800 crystals overall

CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


Calibrations l.jpg

Calibrations

  • Electronic channel level

    • Pedestals & Gains on each of 3 ranges

  • Crystal level: conversion factor

  • Shower level: Energy Scale

CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


Bhabha calibration l.jpg

Bhabha Calibration

e+e-

E/E = 1.4%

@5 GeV

Eshower/Ebeam

  • Assume linearity of light  energy

  • Obtain a single constant per crystal: gives relative gain

  • Select e+e- evts: each e has ~Ebeam

  • Minimize shower energy resolution

    • 78007800 sparse matrix equation (non-zero near diagonal)

  • Once determined, why should they change?

CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


Light collection degradation l.jpg

Light Collection Degradation

Crystals migrate from the top band to the bottom band, then stabilize.

Cause: lucite-CsI glue

joint opens up.

CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


Absolute energy scale l.jpg

Absolute Energy Scale

  • 0

  • 

  • +-

  • (2S)cJ

Fit huge

combinatoric

background & subtract

E

CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


Current cleo scal l.jpg

Current CLEO SCal

CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


Performance l.jpg

Performance

Energy resolution

Angular resolution

M (GeV)

CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


Non photon rejection l.jpg

Non-photon rejection

  • Energy deposited near tracks easy to reject on that basis

  • Nuclear int’ns cause “splitoffs” separated from central shower matched to track

  • Splitoffs cause bgd for 0, 

  • Splitoffs make “neutrino reconstruction” (missing energy) more challenging

  • Several algorithms developed for rejection

    • Based on lateral shower profile- collimated or not?

    • Proximity to track entry points

    • Energy

CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


Lepton id example 2s j j l l l.jpg

Lepton ID Example:(2S)+- J/, J/l+l-

  • e deposits ~all energy

  •  deposits ~220 MeV (min. i.) with Landau tail

  • Form “E/p” variable: shower energy/momentum

    • Peak near ~1 for e

    • Only small tail from  at high E/p

    •  peak near small E/p

MC

Data

CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


Example 2s 0 0 j j l l l.jpg

Example: (2S)00 J/, J/l+l-

Very clean,

well-modeled

000

CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


Conclusions l.jpg

Conclusions

  • W/careful design, a CsI(Tl) EMCal offers excellent resolution in energy (1.5-8%) & angle (3-15mr) for E=0.05-5 GeV

  • Long term stability demonstrated (glue joints!)

  • Preserve energy resolution w/careful summing; angular resolution w/MC corrections to c.o.g.

  • Scale calibration a challenge, but can achieve <0.5% accuracy above 50 MeV with some work

  • Shower shape, track-shower matching both useful for isolation & splitoff rejection

  • Payoff in PHYSICS: -lines, 0 & , e & , -reconstruction

CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


Crystal testing l.jpg

Crystal Testing

CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


Readout l.jpg

Readout

  • 4 diodes/crystal

  • Local preamps, 4 crystals/card

  • Externally summed

  • Shaped

  • Digitized (3 scales to preserve dynamic range)

  • Sparsified

  • To tape

  • Disabled diode compensation

    • CLEO has 4 diodes/crystal, can disable & compensate via downloadable settings to crates

  • Output gets amplified up accordingly

  • After 15 yrs, CLEO has 251/7784 crystals w/1 diodes off because they died or became noisy

    • 240 (1 disabled), 11 (2 disabled), 0 (3 or 4 disabled)

  • CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


    Dead diodes l.jpg

    Dead Diodes

    • Disabled diode compensation

      • CLEO has 4 diodes/crystal, can disable & compensate via downloadable settings to crates

      • Output gets amplified up accordingly

      • After 15 yrs, CLEO has 251/7784 crystals w/1 diodes off because they died or became noisy

        • 240 (1 disabled), 11 (2 disabled), 0 (3 or 4 disabled)

    CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


    How many to sum l.jpg

    How many to sum?

    Optimize additional energy vs additional noise.

    CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


    Position angle determination l.jpg

    Position/angle determination

    • Correction to centroid:

    • ~0 at ctr

    • ~0 at boundaries

    • not symmetric due to 50-mrad tilt away from vertex-pointing & staggering of front faces

    • smaller effect at larger energy because shower spreads more, which helps centroid accuracy

    • peak correction typically 5-10 mm

    CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


    Shower energy scale l.jpg

    Shower Energy Scale

    • Which do you want?

      •  energy peaks at right place

      • 0 mass peaks at right place

    • You can’t have both, because

      • Line shape has low-side tail (leakage!)

    • W/correct  energy,  mass peaks LOWER than M(0)

    • CLEO chose  energy peak to be accurate, allowing 0 constrained fit to fix the bias

    CsI to CMS. B. Heltsley. April 2005


  • Login