Download
slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Motivations for Study and Trigger Constraints Summary of Previous Studies and Work PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Motivations for Study and Trigger Constraints Summary of Previous Studies and Work

Motivations for Study and Trigger Constraints Summary of Previous Studies and Work

120 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Motivations for Study and Trigger Constraints Summary of Previous Studies and Work

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Electron Triggering and B-Physics at L3(BJ/Ks, where J/ ee)Abid Patwa, André Turcot, and Sailesh ChopraB-id Vertical ReviewDØ, FermilabWednesday, April 4, 2001 • Motivations for Study and Trigger Constraints • Summary of Previous Studies and Work • L1 and L2 study of J/ ISAJET events • Current Work & Studies • L3 filtering using TRK, CPS and CAL information • Progress report • Overview • Resolution Study: Matching, Invariant Mass • Preliminary efficiency results • Future Plans and Proposals AGENDA

  2. Motivation for Study • Maintain B-physics analysis with high statistical sample • Use electron decays of J/’s in addition to muons • Calibration of detectors in low energy range • reconstructed J/ mass • understand detector alignments  fit M J/ to alignment constants • Establishing relative energy scales between the CC and EC • coupled to preshower readout capabilities • AFE12 board -- dual threshold, charge division, etc… Necessary to understand trigger resolution and efficiencies for all of the above issues Constraints for J/ee trigger • L1 accept rates defines J/ trigger rate ~ 1.5kHz for both central/forward region • L2 accept rate below a maximum of ~100 Hz • L3 accept rate kept below ~1-5 Hz

  3. Summary of Trigger Studieswith electrons from J/’s • Initial L1 and L2 studies performed (mainly upgrade GEANT): • DØ Note 3249 by Y. Gershtein • low pT electrons from b-quarks • central region: -1.5    1.5 • algorithm: combined CFT tracks and CPS hits • DØ Note 3506 by P. Grannis • J/ trigger in central region (ISAJET) • algorithm: combined CPS and CC info • Results: efficiencies ~6-10% achieved, dependent on CC thresholds • Reasonable trigger rates: L1  1 kHz and L2  50 Hz • DØ Note 3566 by A. Lucotte • J/ trigger in forward region (ISAJET) • algorithm: combined FPS and EC info • reconstructed events processed with upgrade GEANT • Efficiencies as function of FPS strip and ECEM thresholds, Inv. Mass dist.,... see DØ Notes for details • Further studies at L1, L2 ? • Recently started using tsim_l1 and l2, dØtrigsim • Progressing… • Studies at L3:(Patwa, Turcot, Chopra) • Also recently started, progressing well • will outline general scope here

  4. L3 Electron Studies (J/ ee)A. Patwa, A. Turcot, et. al. • Initial work in past ~4-5 months: • Unsuccessful for physics studies • Modified electron results — CAL and CPS info • Number of code breaks, tsim_l3 output crashes • incompatible datafiles with L3 code: require generating files with RawDataChunks • Short-term: • Given limited statistics in MC, develop machinery for future studies with larger samples  “standard” Root macro • Establish foundation • Long-term: • Extract efficiencies, purity, invariant mass dist., … • Understand backgrounds, etc... Proposal

  5. L3 Electron Studies: J/ee (cont.) • Sample: • processed under dØsim p07.00.03 • J/ ee, 1000 events total (two 0.5K files) • Event selected: pythia+QQ; PT (B)  3.0 GeV • at least 2 electrons with PT (e)  1.0 GeV, ||  2.5 • Avg. min. bias overlay: |NMB|=1.1, Poisson distribution • Sample processed under p06.00.01 (mod) dØTrigSim • Modifications in dØTrigSim: • l3fanalyze: • change track extrapolation to 73.96 cm (CPS) from 60 cm (Solenoid) • l3fcps: • change max number of SLCs from 31 to 63 • l3femtools: • change call to L3TCPS to not use z information • change call to L3TCPS to use log weighted Phi position • Note: CAL cluster is taken wrt to PV, but PV used is not stored (p06.00.01)… • trig_mcc3.lst: • change PT(e) threshold for CFT tracks from 3 to 1 GeV • Study concentrates on L3 output: • e+/e-: TRKing, CPS, and CAL information • RootTuples, variable definitions: • some L3 variables straightforward to understand; other variable descriptions difficult  must look at code to understand; little documentation • see http://www-d0.fnal.gov/~abid/b_id_studies.html • L3 Tracking: CFT only

  6. L3 Electron Studies (cont.) Primary L3 Ntuple variables studied: (Global.L3DebugE) • currently available in l3fanalyze (I.e., running d0trigsim) • TRK • L3DEntracks -- Number of tracks • L3DETrphi -- Track Phi • L3DETrZ -- Track Z (wrt PV) • L3DETrPtinv -- Track 1/PT • L3DETrR -- Track radius of curvature R • L3DETrTanl -- Track Tan(),  = track’s dip angle • CAL • L3DEncal -- Number of CAL clusters found by L3TCalCluster • L3DECalPhi -- Cal cluster Phi (vector sum) • L3DECalEta -- Cal cluster Eta (vector sum) • L3DECalWZ, WR, Wphi -- Cal (log-weighted sum) Z, R, phi • L3DECalEt -- Cal cluster measured Et • L3DECalEmfr -- Cal cluster EM fraction • L3DECalEfr1, … L3DECalEfr5 -- Cal cluster E frac. in EM1, …,EM4, FH1 • CPS a.) Form Single Layer Clusters (SLCs): cycle through hit CPS strips, ganging adjacent hit strips into clusters. b.) Form 3D clusters -- matching hits in all three layers. • L3DEncps -- Number of CPS clusters • L3DECpsN1, N2, N3 -- Number of CPS strips above threshold in CPS layers 1, 2, 3 • L3DECpsE1, E2, E3, -- CPS-SLC energy in CPS layers 1, 2, 3 • L3DECpsE -- CPS 3D cluster energy (E1+E2+E3) • L3DECpsPhi -- CPS Phi • L3DECpsZ -- CPS hit z-position • L3DECpsChic2 -- CPS 2 • L3DECpsRes -- CPS hit residuals

  7. L3 J/ Studies: Matching Resolution Comparison: MC electrons with tracks (TRK) and CAL CAL-MC TRK-MC   CAL-MC TRK-MC   • Use MC information • identify only e in data sample, PT 1 GeV • Electrons “tagged” by matched tracks • Require R =  (2+ 2)  0.07 • Basic Approach: • Study matching performance for “tagged” e by cycling/pairing subsystems: CFT, CPS and CAL

  8. J/ electrons — Matching Resolution: TRK-CAL “Tagged” e: CFT tracks and CAL clusters     R • Resolution in : RMS = 63 mrad • okay central core, dominated by tails • may need some improvements… • Benchmark: compare to other L3 electron studies (Z ee, Upsilon  ee ): RMS  (10-25 mrad) • -matching  long tails: • Track  assumes zo of track as primary • under investigation… probable effect: from CAL  determination (primary vertex info…)

  9. J/ electrons — Matching Resolution: CPS-CAL “Tagged” e: CPS clusters and CAL clusters     R • Resolution in : RMS = 29 mrad • better, but may need some more work... • -matching  long tails: • Similar to TRK-CAL • CPS  assumes zo of tagging track as primary

  10. J/ electrons — Matching Resolution: CFT-CPS “Tagged” e: CFT tracks with CPS clusters  z z    - • Improved resolution in : RMS = 6.1 mrad • Two peak distribution from track propogation (B-Field) • separated ve and ve tracks at  ~ 0 • effect known, see: A. Turcot’s study on “Electron-ID using CPS, L3fcps” — on b-id “documents” web-page •    for ve tracks improves RMS = 4.5 mrad • z-matching: needs work • indications are that z(trk) is dominant

  11. For “tagged” e: MC, CAL, CAL-TRK, TRK J/ electrons — Invariant Mass MC CAL M(ee) M(ee) CAL-TRK TRK M(ee) M(ee) • Calculation based on: • TRK gives mass closest to expected • CAL energy scale is off • requires work... • TRK-CAL calculation • driven by CAL energy scale • Comment: substantial improvement in M(ee) with CFT PT = 3  1 GeV (trigger list modification)

  12. Bin Description No. of e % of e 1 GeV 3 GeV 1 GeV 3 GeV 1 MC (all e) 2130 2130 — — 2 e matched TRK 1395 333 65.5 15.6 3 MC-TRK in CPS fid. 1130 271 53.0 12.7 4 e matched CPS551 222 25.8 10.4 5 TRK-CPS, matched CAL 551 222 25.8 10.4 6 e matched CAL 1290 330 60.5 15.5 7 TRK-CAL in CPS fid. 1025265 48.1 12.4 8 TRK-CAL, matched CPS 548 232 25.7 10.8 For “tagged” e: Initial Result on Matching Performance J/ electrons — Matching Efficiency • Very Preliminary; but a start… • Substantial improvement with CFT PT = 3  1 GeV (trigger list modification)

  13. Selection Criteria • Develop electron selection criteria • Try at best to optimize selection, very preliminary • again, No L1 and L2 applied • Basic selection cuts: • kept loose (now) • CAL ET  1 GeV, ||  2.0, Efrac  0.8 • Define CAL-TRK match: ||  0.07 • Define CAL-CPS match: ||  0.05 • Classify electrons in four categories: • 1) “Golden Electron” — TRK, CPS, CAL • 2) CPS-CAL only • 3) TRK-CAL only • 4) CAL only • For J/: • consider only Type 1 and 3 electrons • controlling trigger rates requires at least a track • Apply cuts for each: • Type 1: TRK-CPS: |z|  20 mm, ||  12 mrad • Type 3: TRK-CAL: ||  50 mrad, Efrac  0.95

  14. J/ Signal: Event Selection J/ electrons — Selection Criteria & e-types (cont.) • BJ/Ks, where J/ ee: 1K sample • Most candidates are “Golden”

  15. J/ electrons — Selection Criteria (cont.) Invariant Mass: electron selection criteria applied CAL info TRK M(ee) M(ee) CAL-CPS M(ee) • Calculation based on: • Similar to results from MC tagged e • CAL energy scale shift • at PT  6 GeV, p-scale of CFT-only tracking becomes non-linear

  16. Invariant Mass: Look at Type 1 & 3 Combinations with Background J/ electrons — Selection Criteria (cont.) Preliminary Results J/ 1 K Sample TRK only result M(ee) QCD 20 GeV 8 K sample TRK only result M(ee) • 8K QCD_20 and 9K QCD_40 samples processed with p07.00.01 dØsim • Background studies have just started… • at the moment, results — a day old • but: a move forward...

  17. Closing Remarks • Initial work by A. Lucotte, P. Grannis, et. al. provides useful benchmark for future trigger studies • At all trigger levels, L1  L3 • L3 studies (finally) underway • Very preliminary but tremendous progress has been made! • Analysis machinery being developed • Distribution shapes and cross-checks being done with Zee and Upsilon(1s)  ee samples • Large amount of work still needed... • Future Work: • Aim for larger statistical sample • Efficiencies and Purity studies… • Improvements in invariant mass distributions... • Background studies: QCD events • Perform studies with SMT+CFT tracks (L3 global tracking, d0trigsim) • Incorporate L1 and L2 information… • will require LARGE samples

  18. Reference Slides

  19. Preshower Readout Logic • AFE12 board -- dual threshold, charge division scheme • Two-arms: • High-gain  Low PT physics • CP-violation, B-Physics, J/,… • Low-gain  High PT physics • Higgs, Top, W/Z physics, …