Validation of bertini and chips
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 32

Validation of Bertini and CHIPS PowerPoint PPT Presentation


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

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 )

Download Presentation

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.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 bertini and chips

Validation of Bertini and CHIPS

Outline

  • Models tested

  • Compared to dataset

  • Outlook

Sunanda Banerjee

November 30, 2009


Models tested

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


Data used

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


C p x at 5 0 gev c

π+ + C → p + X at 5.0 GeV/c

119.0°

59.1°


P c p x

p + C → p + X

1.4 GeV/c

7.5 GeV/c

59.1°

119.0°


P u p x

p + U → p + X

1.4 GeV/c

7.5 GeV/c

59.1°

119.0°


A n x at 5 gev c 119

π- + A → n + X at 5 GeV/c (θ = 119°)

Cu

Pb


Mean multiplicity

Mean Multiplicity

  • Energy dependence is smoother in CHIPS for all particles


Mean total ke fraction

Mean Total KE Fraction

  • Energy dependence of total KE fraction is also smoother for CHIPS


Mean response

Mean Response

ECAL+HCAL

HCAL Only

Mean energy response worse for CHIPS at low energies


Energy resolution

Energy Resolution

HCAL Only

ECAL+HCAL

CHIPS predicts much better resolution at low energies


Mip fraction

MIP Fraction (π‾)


A p x at 5 gev c 59 1

π- + A → p + X at 5 GeV/c (θ = 59.1°)

Cu

C

Pb

U


P c p x1

p + C → p + X

1.4 GeV/c

7.5 GeV/c

59.1°

119.0°


P u p x1

p + U → p + X

1.4 GeV/c

7.5 GeV/c

59.1°

119.0°


C u n x at 119

π+ + C/U → n + X at θ = 119°

1.4 GeV/c

5.0 GeV/c

C

U


P a x at 14 6 gev c

p + A → π+ + X at 14.6 GeV/c

y=1.1

y=2.3

Be

Au


P cu k x at 14 6 gev c

p + Cu → K+ + X at 14.6 GeV/c

y=1.1

y=1.5

y=1.9


Mean response ecal hcal

Mean Response (ECAL+HCAL)

Mean energy response best for _EMV(EML) and better in the new version.


Mean response hcal only

Mean Response (HCAL only)


Energy resolution ecal hcal

Energy Resolution (ECAL+HCAL)


Mip fraction1

MIP Fraction (π‾)


Observations

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.


Validation of bertini and chips

BACKUP SLIDES


C p x

π+ + C → p + X

5.0 GeV/c

1.4 GeV/c

59.1°

119.0°


U p x

π+ + U → p + X

1.4 GeV/c

5.0 GeV/c

59.1°

119.0°


A n x at 5 gev c 1191

π- + A → n + X at 5 GeV/c (θ = 119°)

C

Cu

U

Pb


P c u n x at 119

p + C/U → n + X at θ = 119°

1.4 GeV/c

7.5 GeV/c

C

U


P a x at 14 6 gev c1

p + A → π-+ X at 14.6 GeV/c

y=1.1

y=2.3

Be

Au


P cu k x at 14 6 gev c1

p + Cu → K- + X at 14.6 GeV/c

y=1.5

y=1.1

y=1.9


P cu p x at 14 6 gev c

p + Cu → p + X at 14.6 GeV/c

y=1.1

y=1.5

y=1.9

y=2.3


Energy resolution ecal hcal1

Energy Resolution (ECAL+HCAL)


  • Login