System-performance-paper 2018-06-25 » History » Revision 17
System performance paper: 2018/06/25-26¶
5 minutes for each contribution + 30 minutes for general discussion.
|Viktor, Scott||TOF||Introduction||First version||on GitHub|
|Domizia, Ludovico, Mariyan||KL||yes||yes||on GitHub||first draft ready|
|Francois||EMR||Introduction||agreed on 4/5 pages|
|Melissa||Tracker||Introduction||some||on Overleaf||agreed on 5 pages|
|Chris Rogers, Melissa||Track matching||yes||yes||on GitHub|
|Francois, Paul||Detector alignment||MICE note reviewed|
|Chris Hunt, Joe||Magnets|
|Tom, Paolo||Target model||MICE note in progress|
|Ajit, Scott, Craig||Absorber model||Introduction|
- Common data sample:
- 2017/02 and 2017/03 runs
- 2T and 3T in SSD
- 140 - 240 MeV/c
- 3, 6, 10 nominal beams
- LiH, LH2, wedge
- Official MC to be used
- Current draft: https://github.com/pfranchini/MICE-systems-performance-paper/blob/master/Systems-performance.pdf
- Common set of cuts (to be refined):
- Define the banana plot cuts
- Define conservative fiducial cuts
- Agree on the chi^2 cut (probably a loose one)
Cut definition Victoria Chris R. Cuts mapper name Single space point in TOF0 V V
Single space point in TOF1 V V
Time of flight in range 27-32 ns X V or Normalized time of flight in range 1-6 ns V ? Single reconstructed TKU track with chi^2/N_DOF <=4 <10 TKU track within fiducial volume of tracker < 150 mm V V TKU total momentum between 135 and 145 MeV/c X V
Tracked radius at diffuser <= 90 mm V V Muon hypothesis (TOF vs P plane) V ? Single space point in TOF2 X V Single reconstructed TKD track with chi^2/N_DOF X <10 TKD track within fiducial volume of tracker < 150 mm X V TKD total momentum between 100 and 200 MeV/c X V
Downstream aperture cut <= ?? mm X V
Notes and AOB:¶
- RAL: Chris R., Chris H., Viktor, Scott, Craig, Melissa, Paul K.
- Phone: -
- Apologies: -
- TOF: agreed on the outline of the contribution. 3-4 pages.
- Plots we would like to include:
- Time Walk calibration
- Slab DT resolution (few examples, with TW correction)
- T0 correction (few examples, for the software description)
- Slab DT offsee (2D plots for each TOF)
- Slab DT resolution (2D plots for each TOF)
- Overall Slab DT (for each TOF) or only one number (for each TOF)
- Space points creation efficiency (include MC?)
- Include a MC study.
- GitHub: https://github.com/vpec0/MICE-systems-performance-paper/tree/tof-viktor (https://github.com/vpec0/MICE-systems-performance-paper)
- Plots we would like to include:
- Ckov: photoelectron vs momentum curves to be reproduced.
- KL: first draft in place. To be refined/rebalanced once we have the other contributions.
- EMR: include low level efficiency and PID to reject positrons. Francois to work in his contribution once he his done with his manuscript.
- Tracker: agreed on 5 pages
- 1 page hardware
- 2 pages low level recon
- 2 track selection/kalman, noise, efficiency and resolution
A lot of analysis material is ready (and easily adaptable from 7469) and needs to be put together. The noise analysis has never been formalised and may require few more time; Chris R. has done some studies for a past VC. Chris can send around some of these plots made for his paper.
Paul K. has provided some introduction text and Melissa is coordinating the writing.
- Overleaf: https://www.overleaf.com/15352478jfxzzqfbzyxt#/58152572/
- Scott has updated the software framework.
- Use some of the plots produces in Chris R. analysis
- Track matching: Chris R. showed residual plots produced for the emittance note (that won't be included in the paper). Is worth having them in the system paper in order to show the performance of this tool. First contribution from Chris' analysis.
- Detector alignment: Paul K. reviewed Francois' note. Francois to reproduce the equivalent plots present in the note for the data. Agreed on 4-5 pages.
- Magnets: tracker field note in progress; some work to do on the systematics. FC is the missing piece.
- Target model: note in progress and comparison with the LM data to be started (Paul S. suggested using a 700 MeV proton beam). We have to understand what could end up in the paper.
- Absorber model: Ajit has some code in place and Craig Brown is working on some density systematic too. Agreed on the following studies in terms of energy loss:
- geometry of the windows
- temperature (density): different probes show different temperature.
- Diffuser study: work in progress. Most likely will be a separate paper.
- Define a common set of cuts (where needed) using the MAUS cut structure (that once is included in MAUS would require another iteration of the reconstruction).
- Some contributions might end up in a separate stand alone paper.
Brunel workshop: September 2018