Difference between revisions of "SoLID Ecal Weekly 20230518"
From solidwiki
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
==Discussion on Charged Particle PID Analysis Plan== | ==Discussion on Charged Particle PID Analysis Plan== | ||
+ | |||
+ | (Xiaochao) | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Starting point: 18 deg runs: | ||
+ | TS1 = CerSum | ||
+ | TS2= SC-B. and. SC-D | ||
+ | TS3 = SC-A .and. SC-D → SC-C.and.SC-D.and.ShowerSum← need to change this in Darren’s report | ||
+ | TS4 = ShowerSum | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | *Select “center-hit” events: | ||
+ | **use GEM projected position, check that the event has hits in all detectors of the trigger | ||
+ | **use GEM tracking to select events that hit center of ECal | ||
+ | |||
+ | *Setup: | ||
+ | **Obtain preshower and Shower MIP position, convert data to Edep (in MeV) | ||
+ | ***Preshower: | ||
+ | ***Shower: | ||
+ | ****weekly notes say MIP is about FADCint=400, Ye’s slide shows 40 MeV (check: 194*1.5mm*2MeV/cm=58 MeV? Reduction due to Birk effect?). So 1GeV electron → Edep=1GeV*20%sample=200 MeV= 5*40 MeV = 5 * 400 → 2000 in peak integral | ||
+ | ****from Ye’s slide, run 4780 threshold (120mV in TS4) shows up at FADCint=2000; MIP=400 int = 40 MeV Edep = 200 MeV momentum; so 2000 threshold (120mV) → 1 GeV electron; 180 mV → 1.5 GeV/c electron momentum | ||
+ | ****if clear correlation exists between Edep and electron energy, convert FADC peak integral to electron energy: 1 GeV electron energy = 2000 in peak integral | ||
+ | |||
+ | *PID: | ||
+ | **use TS3 (or TS4?) compare Psh, Sh, and Cherenkov spectra with simulation | ||
+ | ***Trigger cuts need to be in simulation | ||
+ | ***could use 1 GeV energy (electron-energy equivalent) bin in ShowerSum (better using PSH+SH sum if calibrated) | ||
+ | ***apply Cherenkov cut to see if it makes sense, but I suspect we can’t use Cherenkov to define “clean” electron samples. | ||
+ | ***either with or without Cherenkov cut, apply 1D preshower cut, and 2D preshower+shower (normalized) cut, study electron efficiency and pion rejection. | ||
==Discussion on AI/ML for PID== | ==Discussion on AI/ML for PID== | ||
==To Do List== | ==To Do List== |
Revision as of 15:55, 18 May 2023
SoLID ECal Weekly May 18, 2023
Contents
Discussion on Tracking
- Presentation by Mike
Discussion on Simulation
- Presentation by Ye
Discussion on Cherenkov
- Presentation by Darren (simulation)
- Presentation by Tim (data)
Discussion on Charged Particle PID Analysis Plan
(Xiaochao)
- Starting point: 18 deg runs:
TS1 = CerSum TS2= SC-B. and. SC-D TS3 = SC-A .and. SC-D → SC-C.and.SC-D.and.ShowerSum← need to change this in Darren’s report TS4 = ShowerSum
- Select “center-hit” events:
- use GEM projected position, check that the event has hits in all detectors of the trigger
- use GEM tracking to select events that hit center of ECal
- Setup:
- Obtain preshower and Shower MIP position, convert data to Edep (in MeV)
- Preshower:
- Shower:
- weekly notes say MIP is about FADCint=400, Ye’s slide shows 40 MeV (check: 194*1.5mm*2MeV/cm=58 MeV? Reduction due to Birk effect?). So 1GeV electron → Edep=1GeV*20%sample=200 MeV= 5*40 MeV = 5 * 400 → 2000 in peak integral
- from Ye’s slide, run 4780 threshold (120mV in TS4) shows up at FADCint=2000; MIP=400 int = 40 MeV Edep = 200 MeV momentum; so 2000 threshold (120mV) → 1 GeV electron; 180 mV → 1.5 GeV/c electron momentum
- if clear correlation exists between Edep and electron energy, convert FADC peak integral to electron energy: 1 GeV electron energy = 2000 in peak integral
- Obtain preshower and Shower MIP position, convert data to Edep (in MeV)
- PID:
- use TS3 (or TS4?) compare Psh, Sh, and Cherenkov spectra with simulation
- Trigger cuts need to be in simulation
- could use 1 GeV energy (electron-energy equivalent) bin in ShowerSum (better using PSH+SH sum if calibrated)
- apply Cherenkov cut to see if it makes sense, but I suspect we can’t use Cherenkov to define “clean” electron samples.
- either with or without Cherenkov cut, apply 1D preshower cut, and 2D preshower+shower (normalized) cut, study electron efficiency and pion rejection.
- use TS3 (or TS4?) compare Psh, Sh, and Cherenkov spectra with simulation