1 / 5

Troubleshooting Kalman Package Integration for MC Simulations

Detailed analysis of issues with Kalman package setup in MICE simulation, including tracker volume definition, magnetic field independence, and misalignment challenges. Recommendations for geometry adjustments and window implementation provided for improved performance evaluation. Key considerations for gas selection and radiation length calculations discussed.

mendel
Download Presentation

Troubleshooting Kalman Package Integration for MC Simulations

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. Progress on MC simulations Problems or regress…

  2. Kalman or reconstrucion… • I looked into the “Kalman” package;SetupKalmanRec.cc in $MICE/Recon/SciFi/src/SetupKalman.cc • I noticed… + The Kalman is not integrated with G4MICE+ Detector description is independent; Tracker 1/2, TOF 1/2/3 - The tracker volume is hard-coded as cylinder (r=50cm, z=150cm) - Tracker volume material need to be defined in Kalman as well (I didn’t) - The default radiation length of the tracker volume is hard-coded as helium! => hardly see any difference between vacuum/helium/air…+ Magnetic field is independent; Bz is constant “SciFiTrackerBField” (4.0097T) - Bx and By is zero, unless defined by separate files (I didn’t use them) - It seems there is no matching coil implemented+ At the first look it is not clear to me if de/dx is (correctly) used or not • That means;- DO NOT TRUST MY PREVIOUS RESULTS!!! on vacuum/helium/air…- misalignment study is very hard; You cannot just change the geometry in G4MICE Simulation, changes needed for Kalman as well. Also you can not use tilted B field map possibly generated by G4MICE Simulation…

  3. Geometry… • In the previous analysis;The region filled by gas is1400mm in G4MICE and 1500mm in Kalman (spectrometer coil region)=> Need to extend the volume to reflect likely position of the window • Reminder; we need to implement a new window both in G4MICE Simulation and Kalman to check tracker performance http://www.physics.ox.ac.uk/design/MICE/MICE-trackermodule/MICE-TM-GA0000-R05.pdf

  4. Performance estimation by hand • The worst case…, the window is at the end of solenoid module:=> thickness of gas from tracker end to window will be about 2.4m • The best case…, the window is close to the tracker end: => thickness ~1.3m • For 200MeV/c muon qplane(rms) rad. yplane (rms) m x/ X0 • He gas; 7.9e-4 6.0e-4 2.29e-4 (x=1.3m) • Air; 4.0e-3 3.0e-3 4.28e-3 (x=1.3m) • He gas; 1.1e-3 1.5e-3 4.23e-4 (x=2.4m) • Air; 5.6e-3 7.7e-3 7.89e-3 (x=2.4m) • A station; 4.1e-3 4.5e-6 4.5e-3 (x=1.9mm) • Filling by air is close tohave another inactive stationor worse. • I would recommend to usehelium which have less than10% of x/X0 compared toa station

  5. Summary • I would recommend to use helium gas instead of air from my calculations.(sorry for not based on simulation study…) • Hopefully, redo the analysis by collaboration meeting…Vacuum/helium/air with proper configuration as well as simulation with no MCS by disabling it in Geant4

More Related