Baryon Number Transport

Using TMVA to distinguish photons

I tried using ROOT's TMVA to test several multivariate tools to distinguish photons from non-photons, based on the preshower energies.

Jan 10 Talk

FGT commissioning

2012-01-10 11:00
2012-01-10 12:00
America/New York
Tuesday, 10 January 2012
EVO bridge, at 16:00 (GMT), duration : 01:00

Present: Hal, Anselm, Bernd,Gerard,Ramiro,Will, Jan, Dave U., and Steve G.

 Milestones for FGT comissioning are :  

  1. ***DONE***  demonstarted 90% of channels work before collossions (pedestals are healthy)
  2. ***DONE***  FGT hold 3.6kV w/ ArCo2 gass
  3. demonstarted 90% of channels still work when beam circulates
  4. timing is set
  5. mapping in offline DB is correct
  6. set workig point for pp500 

 

FGT commissioning tasks  ver 2   (time ordered, [M]- denotes a milestone) 

 
------- FEE powered on, STAR DAQ operational ------ 
 
1) setup all control files and demonstarte all GUIs are operational
2a) ped+status table ,  [M1: 90% of APV works & 90% of channels/each APV works]
2b) adjust APV ped in fee , repeat - if needed 
3) access: fix broken hardware
4) HV test w/o beam , N2 gas, 1 day, Bernd, [M2: FGT holds 3.6kV]
5) swap gas , N2-->ArCo2, Bob S. , 1/2 day, just before collisions
------- require collision overnight ---------  
6) HV up/down w/ collisions, 6 days, Bernd+Gerrit
7a) ped+status table , 1 day  [M3: 90%-90% live channels under beam] 
7b)  access: fix broken hardware
------- minB trigger set -----
8)  attempt to catch FGT collision signal during ETOW timing using minB trigger
-------   EHT trigger, possible 3/4 of ETOW HV off to better use avaliable band width ----
10) set timing, 3 data sets taken 2 days apart, 1 week, Jan+Gerard , [M4: timing set]
* set 1 : disperse offsets for groups 5APV (per octant), scan TCD delay to catch collision in some 
* set 2 : adjust all APVs, determine residual corrections per APV
* set 3 : verify signal centered at 2nd time bin for all APV chips
11) re-adjust APV ped
12) verify quadrant mapping, 1 day , few data sets with quadrants HV on/off
13) verify APV mapping, take few data sets with alternative APVs on/off .
--------- regular pp200 physics data taking, many fills  ---------

13) study of FGT working point : multiple data sets, ~2 days per set, considered combinations:

     *gas mix: 70-30 , 90-10 
     * HV set to 3.4, 3.5, 3.6 kV
     * low gain ref data at  low HV with one gas mix
14) verify strip mapping using  large  data sets, needs non-existing software [M5: mapping in DB is correct]

------------ after few weeks of pp200 data taking -------

15) tune APV  params to optimize signal shape,  Criterium:   signal amplitude to noise RMS , no code for that  

16) enable ZS , requires Willie's online monitoring to work, and on-line peds computation (by Tonko's  code?) 

----------- before switch to pp500 ---------

17) chose final working point for FGT HV & gas-mix [M6: pp500 lworking point]

-----------  pp500, take production data: goal prove FGT works ---------

 18) operational L2W algo w/ monitoring , Ross works on it now

 

 

Minutes:

  •  overview of commissioning plan, revision follows (draft schedule in attachment, obsolete), main conclusions:
    • significant # of tasks can and should be accomplished before the first collisions - see green section
      • analysis of ped+stat of one taken already run should proceed now
    • we do not have schedule with dates & names, I'll not give up on this
    • there are 4 people who will be allowed to operate FGT HV are: Benrd,Gerrit,Ross,Ramiro
    • handling of FGT operation in to STAR crew is a very distant idea, the plan is this 4 people will support fgt operation on site as long as it is needed 
    • finding the collision signal in FGT data is perceived as very difficult (shown in red)
      • it is safer to require the EHT trigger (plan A), but also try to see FGT signal with minB trigger during EMC timing scan (very optimistic scenario)
      • FGT deadtime in the early weeks is ~700 us, e.g. 7% dead @ 100 Hz.
      •  may require lower EHT thres and turn of HV for 3/4 of ETOW - need dedictaed trig config & EMC settings
      • deveopement of not existing code fitting time dependence of individual pulses has  been elevated to the top
      • in parallel developement of nonexisting code fitting integrals will be pursued
    • verification of mapping in DB will have 3 phases: quadrant, APV, and strip-level
    • tuning of peds in APV will be done twice: ASAP, and after timing is adjusted
    • not decided what FGT gas pressuer & HV will be set for study of the best working point (days-long data sets in pp200)
      • analysis criteria were discussed: efficiency vs. HV; cluster size; efficiency vs. saturation of cluster energy; MIP signal to pedestal width;
      • with disconnect to avaliable software - there is no code do generate any of those observables nor people to schedule to work on it
    • identified need for software to evaluate signal/noise , needed to tune APV settings
  • the discussion about use of existing vs. developing new code was endless.  People remained faithful to their respective views. In my opinin the comissioning task #16 - enableing ZS for pp500 - requires Willie to finish up the code he started.  Many side benefits justify Willie does it now, not  in a month. 
  • questions from Jan:
    •  access dates  - Bernd will sent a note
    • will FEE be on 24/7 : yes, said Gerard
    • how do we deal with correlated noise : Gerard suspects it is not a big issue, we have ped file taken w/ STAR DAQ and a maker based software to compute sth. Limitted (to 1) possible manopwer. Analysis downgraded in priority, after code for items up to 13 is in hand.
    • when do we switch to ZS mode? G: at the end of pp200.
    • will we ever use  wave form readout mode? G: we do it already. 
  • NOT discuss status of FGT readout based on Willie's plots http://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/23008/
 
 
 

 

FGT Online Monitoring

I've been working on creating a set of monitoring tools for the FGT, intended to replicate what has been done for BSMD pedestals.  Currently, for every APV the software generates a two-di

SMD Residual vs Tower Energy Plots

SMD Residual vs Tower Energy Plots

These plots are for prompt photon MC sample. What's plotted on y axis is the sum of max residual

Summary Discussion

Speaker : All


Talk time : 17:10, Duration : 00:20

Software

Speaker : S.Margetis


Talk time : 16:35, Duration : 00:35

J.Thomas

Speaker : SSD


Talk time : 16:00, Duration : 00:35

Break


Talk time : 15:00, Duration : 01:00

Budget&Schedule

Speaker : S.Morgan


Talk time : 12:50, Duration : 00:20

Integration

Speaker : D.Beavis


Talk time : 14:40, Duration : 00:20

E.Anderssen

Speaker : Global Structures


Talk time : 14:20, Duration : 00:20

IST status

Speaker : G.J. van Nieuwenhuizen ( MIT )


Talk time : 13:45, Duration : 00:35

PXL status

Speaker : L.Greiner


Talk time : 13:10, Duration : 00:35

intriduction and Overview

Speaker : F.Videbaek


Talk time : 12:30, Duration : 00:20

Nuclear Physics Seminar Slides

Workaround for star-submit for large filelists on pdsf

On pdsf, especially when the disk is very full, it takes a very long time to enumerate a large file list (example, my file list of 181k files took ~5 hours to enumerate when eliza 17 was 94% full).

PST in agml

  1.  current work : here

FGT SW Leak Tests

A bfc.C file was run over a DAQ file with 10k events, taken late 2011, which includes the FGT.  Additionally, a different bfc.C was run on 300 events from a Pythia W .fz file for the purpose of testing the FGT slow simulator.  Four difference sets of code was used, and the resident and virtual memory was recorded every 30 seconds.  Plots are shown of the resident and virtual memory size as a function of the number of events processed.  The results show no obvious leaks arising from the libraries in offline/StDevel/StRoot.  The results also verify that both data and Monte Carlo can be run with a BFC and that the FGT data is recorded in the resulting MuDst file.