Difference between revisions of "Meeting solid ec"

From solidwiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(→‎ECal weekly July 2025)
 
(11 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
=ECal weekly July 2025 =
 +
* Weekly ECal July 25, 2025
 +
** Bench testing: Michael L. - everything is set up in Carl's lab. Observed that high rate (~2 MHz) discrete pulse produces similar gain shift to constant background. Observed 2x gain shift with 60uA anode current. Talked about checking current is the same in ammeter and O-scope, setting HV to 860V instead of 875V, characterizing gain shift with discrete pulses.
 +
***https://solid.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/File:Benchtest_7_25_25.pdf
 +
 +
* Weekly ECal July 17, 2025
 +
** Mohhamed showed preliminary ML PID pion rejection with momentum cuts, see slides
 +
*** https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1XI0YluR9d21wC0WPXf7Q7z11rddN-rIJp-qMPFhaozw/edit?usp=sharing
 +
** Bench testing: we talked about using two LEDs, one in DC and one in pulse mode, to simulate background vs. signal. Michael L. will also look into the PMT base calculation code
 +
 +
* SoLID Collaboration Meeting July 7-8, 2025
 +
**
 +
 +
* Weekly ECal July 3, 2025
 +
** Mohhamed presented ML PID progress: still need to add smearing to match simulated spectra to data; need to separate charged pions from pi0's.
 +
** Ye contacted Lorenzo about preshower radiation dose from Fluka. Lorenzo need to run the code to get this information
 +
** Bench testing Shower PMT: Michael L. showed a few pictures of the laser and LED setup
 +
 +
=ECal weekly June 2025 =
 +
* Weekly ECal June 27, 2025 (Friday)
 +
** Ye showed simulated radiation dose for 82 deg, it's dominated by BeamOnTarget "total including hadrons", which is ~10 times higher than pi+/- and pi0.
 +
** ML PID: we are still confused by how to mix background with signal -> after off-line discussions, we (MR, DUP, XZ) realized the background mixing meaning adding the signal in real time. So for 40-ns timing window, the ratio of bg/signal is simply 40ns times the background total rate.  We got the total integrated rate from Ye, see... (slides?)
 +
** Michael L. discussed bench testing progress.
 +
 +
*Weekly ECal June 5, 2025
 +
** Sort of like the "summer kickoff" meeting. We will have Mohhamed working on ML PID and Michael L. working on PMT bench-testing.
 +
** To follow up on questions from the last meeting, the dosimeter reading at GEM0 frame (front-most) was in the 70's to 100's of krad.
 +
 
=ECal weekly May 2025 =
 
=ECal weekly May 2025 =
 +
 +
*Weekly ECal May 22, 2025
 +
** Xiaochao showed a summary of known radiation hardness information of scintillators and fibers, see slides: [https://solid.jlab.org/wiki/images/0/04/Summary_radhard_20250522.ppt Summary_radhard_20250522.ppt] or [https://solid.jlab.org/wiki/images/7/79/Summary_radhard_20250522.pdf Summary_radhard_20250522.pdf]
 +
** PMT bench testing: setting up FADC would take time, we can start with just QDC (and scope)
 +
** It was brought up that Zhongling at JLab is setting up FADC/CODA in ESB for DAQ test, to support LAPPD test of Sanghwa.
 +
** Need to email Carl Zone about bench testing
 +
** What was the total radiation of the beam test?
 +
 
* Weekly ECal May 8, 2025
 
* Weekly ECal May 8, 2025
 
** Ye's slides on comparison of preCDR vs. latest simulation. Note that the preCDR plot (on 2D plane energy vs. R, reproduced by Ye) is for e.g. "pi- from pi-" while the latest simulation is "everything from pi-". Even though the plots are for different things, it seems to contradict the table that the latest simulation gives much higher radiation background.
 
** Ye's slides on comparison of preCDR vs. latest simulation. Note that the preCDR plot (on 2D plane energy vs. R, reproduced by Ye) is for e.g. "pi- from pi-" while the latest simulation is "everything from pi-". Even though the plots are for different things, it seems to contradict the table that the latest simulation gives much higher radiation background.
Line 6: Line 42:
  
 
* Weekly ECal May 1, 2025
 
* Weekly ECal May 1, 2025
−
** Ye worked out a way to extract the z-dependence of Edep in the Preshower and Shower. Counting the whole preshower as a layer, the radiation is pretty high. However, the radiation in the Shower layers does not look much worse than preCDR, though the exact z-dependence is different.
+
** Ye worked out a way to extract the z-dependence of Edep in the Preshower and Shower. Counting the whole preshower as a layer, the radiation is pretty high. On the other hand, the radiation in the Shower layers does not look much worse than preCDR, though the exact z-dependence is different. See her presentation: [https://solid.jlab.org/wiki/images/6/6d/PVDIS_simulation_configuration_comparison_04302025.pdf PVDIS_simulation_configuration_comparison_04302025.pdf]. Note that the radiation dose of the preshower needs to be integrated over the preshower's Z (slides 2 left, 8, and 9 left).  
 
** Jianping suggested re-visting low-energy pion comparison of bggen vs. wiser, i.e. DVCS and MARATHON data analyzed by Ye Tian (IMP) and Zhihong. -- followup on 5/8: Ye dig out the old slide but that study stopped at 2GeV for the pion momentum (minimum).
 
** Jianping suggested re-visting low-energy pion comparison of bggen vs. wiser, i.e. DVCS and MARATHON data analyzed by Ye Tian (IMP) and Zhihong. -- followup on 5/8: Ye dig out the old slide but that study stopped at 2GeV for the pion momentum (minimum).
 
** Mike and Richard talked to Carl about benchtesting the Shower PMTs, to be followed by MAPMT and MCP-PMT tests.
 
** Mike and Richard talked to Carl about benchtesting the Shower PMTs, to be followed by MAPMT and MCP-PMT tests.
Line 16: Line 52:
 
*** ECal resolution: had to add by hand about 35% for PSH, 10% for SH
 
*** ECal resolution: had to add by hand about 35% for PSH, 10% for SH
 
*** one result is ML PID charged pion rejection vs. e- efficiency -- something comparable to classical PID
 
*** one result is ML PID charged pion rejection vs. e- efficiency -- something comparable to classical PID
 +
*** the only thing missing was background simulation!
  
 
=ECal weekly April 2025 =
 
=ECal weekly April 2025 =

Latest revision as of 11:41, 25 July 2025

ECal weekly July 2025

  • Weekly ECal July 25, 2025
    • Bench testing: Michael L. - everything is set up in Carl's lab. Observed that high rate (~2 MHz) discrete pulse produces similar gain shift to constant background. Observed 2x gain shift with 60uA anode current. Talked about checking current is the same in ammeter and O-scope, setting HV to 860V instead of 875V, characterizing gain shift with discrete pulses.
  • SoLID Collaboration Meeting July 7-8, 2025
  • Weekly ECal July 3, 2025
    • Mohhamed presented ML PID progress: still need to add smearing to match simulated spectra to data; need to separate charged pions from pi0's.
    • Ye contacted Lorenzo about preshower radiation dose from Fluka. Lorenzo need to run the code to get this information
    • Bench testing Shower PMT: Michael L. showed a few pictures of the laser and LED setup

ECal weekly June 2025

  • Weekly ECal June 27, 2025 (Friday)
    • Ye showed simulated radiation dose for 82 deg, it's dominated by BeamOnTarget "total including hadrons", which is ~10 times higher than pi+/- and pi0.
    • ML PID: we are still confused by how to mix background with signal -> after off-line discussions, we (MR, DUP, XZ) realized the background mixing meaning adding the signal in real time. So for 40-ns timing window, the ratio of bg/signal is simply 40ns times the background total rate. We got the total integrated rate from Ye, see... (slides?)
    • Michael L. discussed bench testing progress.
  • Weekly ECal June 5, 2025
    • Sort of like the "summer kickoff" meeting. We will have Mohhamed working on ML PID and Michael L. working on PMT bench-testing.
    • To follow up on questions from the last meeting, the dosimeter reading at GEM0 frame (front-most) was in the 70's to 100's of krad.

ECal weekly May 2025

  • Weekly ECal May 22, 2025
    • Xiaochao showed a summary of known radiation hardness information of scintillators and fibers, see slides: Summary_radhard_20250522.ppt or Summary_radhard_20250522.pdf
    • PMT bench testing: setting up FADC would take time, we can start with just QDC (and scope)
    • It was brought up that Zhongling at JLab is setting up FADC/CODA in ESB for DAQ test, to support LAPPD test of Sanghwa.
    • Need to email Carl Zone about bench testing
    • What was the total radiation of the beam test?
  • Weekly ECal May 8, 2025
    • Ye's slides on comparison of preCDR vs. latest simulation. Note that the preCDR plot (on 2D plane energy vs. R, reproduced by Ye) is for e.g. "pi- from pi-" while the latest simulation is "everything from pi-". Even though the plots are for different things, it seems to contradict the table that the latest simulation gives much higher radiation background.
    • Zhiwen will dig into how Jin extracted radiation dose from the particle rate plots.
    • We discussed the labor cost of large-angle ECal and SPD assembly and testing. Here is Richard's estimate, consistent with 2023 estimate of 744 PW scaled by area of 440/1800.
  • Weekly ECal May 1, 2025
    • Ye worked out a way to extract the z-dependence of Edep in the Preshower and Shower. Counting the whole preshower as a layer, the radiation is pretty high. On the other hand, the radiation in the Shower layers does not look much worse than preCDR, though the exact z-dependence is different. See her presentation: PVDIS_simulation_configuration_comparison_04302025.pdf. Note that the radiation dose of the preshower needs to be integrated over the preshower's Z (slides 2 left, 8, and 9 left).
    • Jianping suggested re-visting low-energy pion comparison of bggen vs. wiser, i.e. DVCS and MARATHON data analyzed by Ye Tian (IMP) and Zhihong. -- followup on 5/8: Ye dig out the old slide but that study stopped at 2GeV for the pion momentum (minimum).
    • Mike and Richard talked to Carl about benchtesting the Shower PMTs, to be followed by MAPMT and MCP-PMT tests.
    • Darren gave a presentation SoLID ECal ML PID on the latest status (from Nov. 2024) of AI/ML PID study. Recap:
      • the study was done using simulation without background, then applied to data
      • e vs. pi0: ML output could reject pi0's (since probability of pi0 is always < 0.5)
      • applying ML to data, we see pi+, pi- and e ID in the output
      • ML-ID'ed e- and pi+ or pi- preshower, ShSum from data agree with simulation very well
      • ECal resolution: had to add by hand about 35% for PSH, 10% for SH
      • one result is ML PID charged pion rejection vs. e- efficiency -- something comparable to classical PID
      • the only thing missing was background simulation!

ECal weekly April 2025

  • Weekly ECal April 10, 2025
    • LHCb tracker upgrade, Table 3.4. (Note 1Gy = 100rad)

ECal weekly March 2025

  • Weekly ECal March 27, 2025
    • Ye showed comparison of Jin's preCDR and latest study. Checking particle entering ECal. Large difference already between Jin's and "THis study" using short endcap and Babar baffle. This means the difference is in the generator (or the interpretation), not the endcap and magnet.


ECal weekly February 20, 2025

  • Mike's PID update. Some discussions:
    • JP: what are the uncertainties in the preshower and Shower calibration? -> Ye and Mike need to find the uncertainty. Ben's plot may be more precise
    • Ye: there is also a 65uA (4409) run
    • JP: there should also be a Preshower cut
  • Question arose how the preshower radiation dose is 3 times higher now (SOLID PVDIS) vs. preCDR value...!
    • JP: there was a study of Fluka va. GEANT by Lorenzo Zana before the Science Review, need to dig this out
    • We need to vet the statements of *3 and *5 estimate (how much SoLID PVDIS is higher than the beam test in terms of radiation dose in the ECal modules, currently in the report)
  • Comments on the report draft:
    • FADC timing should not be in the Shower section

ECal weekly March 2024 to December 2024

  • Weekly ECal October 31, 2024
    • Ben started analyzing the THU base. Here is his Calculation on all three PMT bases
    • Zhihong shared pictures of the super-module being assembled at THU: pic0, pic1, pic2; He will also send a new PMT base design diagram (for the super module) so we can study its possible gain shift in advance
    • Zhihong will look if there are old PMTs with the same base as the 2023 Hall C beamtest, and will do a bench test to study the gain shift if any such PMT/base is found.
    • Xiaochao shared a rough draft of the beam test report. Still need to wrap up some calculation, and need someone to double check all numbers.

ECal weekly March 2023 to February 2024

FY2022 beam test summary

ECal weekly January 2023 to March 2023

ECal weekly January 2013 to October 2022

Retrieved from "https://solid.jlab.org/wiki/index.php?title=Meeting_solid_ec&oldid=2104"