Cellular Automaton Method for Track Finding (HERA-B, LHCb, CBM)
description
Transcript of Cellular Automaton Method for Track Finding (HERA-B, LHCb, CBM)
Cellular Automaton MethodCellular Automaton Methodfor Track Findingfor Track Finding
(HERA-B, LHCb, CBM)(HERA-B, LHCb, CBM)
Ivan KiselIvan Kisel
Kirchhoff-Institut für PhysikKirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Uni-Heidelberg, Uni-Heidelberg
Second FutureDAQ Workshop, GSISeptember 9, 2004
KIPKIP
9 September 2004, GSI9 September 2004, GSI Ivan Kisel, KIP, Uni-HeidelbergIvan Kisel, KIP, Uni-Heidelberg 22
Cellular Automaton MethodCellular Automaton Method
Being essentially local and parallel cellular automata avoid exhaustive combinatorial searches, even when implemented on conventional computers. . Since cellular automata operate with highly structured information (for instance sets of tracklets connecting space points), the amount of data to be processed in the course of the track search is significantly reduced. - Further reduction of information to be processed is achieved by smart definition of the tracklets neighborhood. Usually cellular automata employ a very simple track model which leads to utmost computational simplicity and a fast algorithm. .
543210
Define : .•CELLS -> TRACKLETSCELLS -> TRACKLETS•NEIGHBORS -> TRACK MODELNEIGHBORS -> TRACK MODEL•RULES -> BEST TRACK CANDIDATERULES -> BEST TRACK CANDIDATE•EVOLUTION -> CONSECUTIVE OR PARALLELEVOLUTION -> CONSECUTIVE OR PARALLEL
Define : .•CELLS -> TRACKLETSCELLS -> TRACKLETS•NEIGHBORS -> TRACK MODELNEIGHBORS -> TRACK MODEL•RULES -> BEST TRACK CANDIDATERULES -> BEST TRACK CANDIDATE•EVOLUTION -> CONSECUTIVE OR PARALLELEVOLUTION -> CONSECUTIVE OR PARALLEL
Collect tracks
Create tracklets
9 September 2004, GSI9 September 2004, GSI Ivan Kisel, KIP, Uni-HeidelbergIvan Kisel, KIP, Uni-Heidelberg 33
HERA-B TrackingHERA-B Tracking
NIM A489 (2002) 389; NIM A490 (2002) 546
9 September 2004, GSI9 September 2004, GSI Ivan Kisel, KIP, Uni-HeidelbergIvan Kisel, KIP, Uni-Heidelberg 44
HERA-B Vertex Detector TrackingHERA-B Vertex Detector Tracking
NIM A489 (2002) 389; NIM A490 (2002) 546
9 September 2004, GSI9 September 2004, GSI Ivan Kisel, KIP, Uni-HeidelbergIvan Kisel, KIP, Uni-Heidelberg 55
HERA-B Pattern TrackingHERA-B Pattern Tracking
NIM A489 (2002) 389; NIM A490 (2002) 546
9 September 2004, GSI9 September 2004, GSI Ivan Kisel, KIP, Uni-HeidelbergIvan Kisel, KIP, Uni-Heidelberg 66
HERA-B Pattern Tracking (cont.)HERA-B Pattern Tracking (cont.)
NIM A489 (2002) 389; NIM A490 (2002) 546
9 September 2004, GSI9 September 2004, GSI Ivan Kisel, KIP, Uni-HeidelbergIvan Kisel, KIP, Uni-Heidelberg 77
LHCb L1 Track FindingLHCb L1 Track Finding
TripletTriplet
LHCb Trigger TDR, CERN-LHCC-2003-031; LHCb Note 2003-064
Find VELO 2D tracks (~70) and reconstruct 3D primary vertex Reconstruct high-impact parameter tracks (~10%) in 3D Extrapolate to TT through small magnetic field -> PT Match tracks to L0 muon objects -> PT and PID Select B-events using impact parameter and PT information Use T1-3 data to improve further selection (5-10% of events)
Phi-Z viewPhi-Z view
R-Z viewR-Z view
•Select 2D tracks with large IP parameter•Reconstruct track by track•Start with long (best) tracks•Work in Phi-Z projection (not really 3D -> faster, but problem of displaced tracks)•Keep best candidate•Remove used phi clusters
9 September 2004, GSI9 September 2004, GSI Ivan Kisel, KIP, Uni-HeidelbergIvan Kisel, KIP, Uni-Heidelberg 88
LHCb L1 Tracking EfficiencyLHCb L1 Tracking Efficiency
time (ms)
E
ven
ts CPU (CA)CPU (CA)
5 ms5 ms 15 15 ss
Even
ts
time (s)
FPGA (CA)FPGA (CA)
LHCb Trigger TDR, CERN-LHCC-2003-031; LHCb Note 2003-064
Track subsetsTrack subsets
Reference B longReference prim. longReference BReference primaryReference setAll setExtra setCloneGhost
97.799.196.698.797.093.681.1 4.5 6.3
95.197.193.393.992.387.570.2 4.0 9.3
2D % 3D<70> <8>
Noise level, %
Number of Clusters
Accepted Clusters
Data reduction
Useful Clusters filtered
Efficiency RefB
Efficiency RefPrim
0.00 607607 524524 13.7% 3.9% 99.3% 98.9%
0.05 659659 530530 19.6% 3.9% 99.3% 98.9%
0.10 710710 536536 24.5% 3.9% 99.3% 98.9%
0.15 761761 544544 28.5% 3.6% 99.3% 98.9%
0.20 812812 553553 31.9% 3.6% 99.3% 98.9%
0.30 914914 573573 37.3% 3.5% 99.3% 98.9%
9 September 2004, GSI9 September 2004, GSI Ivan Kisel, KIP, Uni-HeidelbergIvan Kisel, KIP, Uni-Heidelberg 99
CBM Track FindingCBM Track Finding
MC Truth -> YES
PERFORMANCE•Evaluation of efficiencies•Evaluation of resolutions•Histogramming•Timing•Statistics•Event display
MC Truth -> NO
RECONSTRUCTION•Fetch MC data•Copy to local arrays and sort•Create tracklets•Link tracklets•Create track candidates•Select tracks
Main ProgramMain Program
Event LoopEvent Loop
Reconstruction PartReconstruction Part
Performance PartPerformance Part
Parabola
Straight line
9 September 2004, GSI9 September 2004, GSI Ivan Kisel, KIP, Uni-HeidelbergIvan Kisel, KIP, Uni-Heidelberg 1010
CBM Tracking EfficiencyCBM Tracking Efficiency
RECO STATISTICS 100 events Refprim efficiency : 98.36 | 46562 Refset efficiency : 94.85 | 49250 Allset efficiency : 90.09 | 64860 Extra efficiency : 77.79 | 15610 Clone probability : 0.11 | 74 Ghost probability : 5.18 | 3358 Reco MC tracks/event : 648 Timing/event : 175 ms
RECO STATISTICS 100 events Refprim efficiency : 98.36 | 46562 Refset efficiency : 94.85 | 49250 Allset efficiency : 90.09 | 64860 Extra efficiency : 77.79 | 15610 Clone probability : 0.11 | 74 Ghost probability : 5.18 | 3358 Reco MC tracks/event : 648 Timing/event : 175 ms
ALL MC TRACKSALL MC TRACKSRECONSTRUCTABLE TRACKS
Number of hits >= 3
REFERENCE TRACKS
Momentum > 1 GeV
TIMING (ms)
Fetch ROOT MC data 63.3
Copy to local arrays and sort 12.4
Create and link tracklets 115.7115.7
Create track candidates 53.553.5
Select tracks 2.62.6
TIMING (ms)
Fetch ROOT MC data 63.3
Copy to local arrays and sort 12.4
Create and link tracklets 115.7115.7
Create track candidates 53.553.5
Select tracks 2.62.6
FPGACo-processor
98%
CPU2%
CA – INTRINSICALLY LOCAL AND PARALLEL
CA – INTRINSICALLY LOCAL AND PARALLEL
9 September 2004, GSI9 September 2004, GSI Ivan Kisel, KIP, Uni-HeidelbergIvan Kisel, KIP, Uni-Heidelberg 1111
Status and PlanStatus and Plan
• All software is (almost) ready and tested in the CBM framework:•Track finding and fitting•Primary and secondary vertex finding and fitting (geo. and constr.)•Performance evaluation•Level-1 trigger classes
• Need 1-2 weeks to finish “off-line” version• Start “on-line” version development