Post on 14-Jan-2016
description
Tracking
Drew Alton
University of Michigan
vs vs
vs pT vs Q
vs tick vs Ntrk
P14 Tracking
Promised better tracking Bump hunting Efficiency Resolutions
We still need some improvements
# hits/Track 2 for tracks Mass locations…tuning
material/magnetic field
Must run faster and more reliably
A look at reco-cloggers
Highlights of the many bumps we have
p+
0
multiple tracks with ~cm impact parameters
DØ Run II Preliminary
= 114 pb-
1
Z Peak
Nice Z peak. Note that the
resolution improvement is dramatic
Impact Parameter
The IP resolution is within 10% of expectations.
Tracking Efficiency
Track Match Efficiency in Zee Spatial
CC 0.895+-0.009 EC 0.779+-0.029
Spatial +E/p CC 0.808+-0.013 EC Same…no E/p
Can Forward tracking be improved using FPS MIP layer?
Image of HDI from γ-conversions
6-chip SMT HDI
SMTCFT
X, cm
Y, cm
HV cap
Timing
It’s not perfect
Z->ee track comparison between data/MC
As you can see the number of hits doesn’t agree between data and Monte Carlo.
The 2 distribution in data is wider and has a long tail.
Mass
The mass of the J/ is about 1/3 of a sigma low
Most peaks have similar issues
Currently there is work in the tracking group to understand how to separate effects from material and magnetic field.
mass fromEM clusters
mass fromtracks
Reco-Cloggers
These events were identified on the farms by Mike Diesburg and named by Tom Diehl.
They run forever…eventually Mike kills them
Crossing Dependence
The distribution of RC events seems to depend on crossing number.
The CFT has a crossing dependence to it’s pedestal mean (random channel)
Crossing Dep. of RC
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Crossing # / Superbunch
Nu
mb
er o
f R
C e
ven
ts
Improvements
P14.04
Full d0reco
P14.04 + p14.05 tracking
Full d0reco
Timing
(GHz s/event)
64.8 (CPU)
135.0 (real)
43.0 (CPU)
43.4 (real)
Memory (vmem)
2GB 650MB
Tracking in p14.05 is supposed to mitigate Removes “crumbling” clusters On a file from run 179934 (46e30) (3k events) on CAB
Historic Reminders
About two years ago we had SMT+
A year ago we had tracking
efficiencies 45-65 %. now we’re in the 90’s for high pt and isolated. Where will we be next year? Mike and Flera have a list of projects…see
http://www-d0.fnal.gov/global_tracking/projects/active.html