Status of the calibrations

1
Status of the calibrations

• Analysis website, runlists, kinematics and
  database
• Pass 0, data stability, pass 1
• Calibration issues
• Optics

2
Analysis Website
Kept like a log book Used during phone
conferences Easier to organize compared to
electronic and paper logbooks It is faster for me
to click on a link than turn the pages of my log
book
www.jlab.org/clasie
3
Analysis Website

• All of the Panel kumacs (and more) can be viewed
  simply by scrolling
• Easier to see changes from run to run
• Faster to view all runs for quality control
• Needed new kumacs and scripts to automate the
  publishing of images

4
Analysis Website
Presentations related to e01-107 can be
downloaded, including this talk Please let me
know if you would like anything included
5
Runlists
Runlist by run
Jason helped write this during the July running
period
Runlist by setting
All good production runs are listed here Both
runlists can be found on the analysis website
6
Kinematics file

• Updated by shift workers
• Needed many fixes
• Checked with the hallc log, runsheets, runlist by
  run, and the TV camera snapshots

7
Database files
Pass 0 required only a small database, Pass 1 was
more complex
param dbase Detector 49501 49501 Hcer 4950
1 49501 Scer 49501 49501 Haero 49540 49501 Sdc 495
40 49501 Shodo 49540 49501 Hcal 49540 49501 Scal 4
9540 49501 Hhodo 49540 49501 Hdc 49549 49549 Hdc 4
9549 49549 Sdc 49549 49549 Shodo ... 468 entries
C program
8
Pass0

• Dave G. made the point for the WC's that if the
  calibrations change and stay changed, then this
  is a good run to calibrate
• This was done for all detectors
• Calibrate infrequently, only 7 runs
• 49540, 49598, 49701, 49798, 49882, 52201 and
  52321
• Replay ALL runs and check for stability
• Ntuples are located on temporary storage
  /scratch/clasie and backed up on the cdaq machines

9
Data stability
SOS beta histogram was fit with a Gaussian for
each run
10
Data stability
Mean of ssbeta during the July running
period Error bars show /- sigma
SOS beta
Run number
11
Data stability
Plot of ssbeta vs. cumulative charge for run 49543
Cointime (ns)
SOS beta
Cumulative charge
The HMS was stable for this run, but there are
jumps in the HMS too!
12
Data stability

• Not sure what is causing the problem yet
• The runs affected are
• HMS 49612 49615 49621 49622 49624 49626 49627
  49628
• SOS 49543 49546 49547 49552 49565 49569 49572
  49573 49575 49576 49577 49603 49612 49613 49624
  49628
• It appears that planes 1 and 2 shifted in time
  relative to 3 and 4

13
Data stability
HMS- July running period
HMS beta
Run number
14
Data stability
December running period
SOS beta
Run
HMS beta
Run
15
Cerenkov calibrations

• Need the adc difference spe peak pedestal
• Pedestal Gaussian
• SPE peak

HMS gas Cerenkov Three Gaussian curves HMS
aerogel Two Gaussian line SOS gas Cerenkov
Two Gaussian line Peter's gas Cerenkov Two
Gaussian line
16
Calibration of Peter's Cerenkov

• The pedestal for sig1 is noisy
• Peters' Cerenkov has only 1 PMT, but two outputs
  (sig2 inverted sig1)
• Use (sig1 sig2) to find the spe peak - Dave G.

17
Calibration of Peter's Cerenkov

• How do we go from the spe peak of this plot to
  the number of photo-electrons?

• The calibration constant for PMT 1, call it ?1
  1/(spe adc1)
• Then npe ?1adc1??adc2...
• Instead, we use ????? 1/(spe adc1-2)
• So, the npe ????? (adc1-?adc2) ????? adc1 -
  ????? adc2

18
Calibration of Peter's Cerenkov

• We can do this last subtraction by using in the
  scer.param file
• scer_adc_to_npe 1/19.7, -1/19.7, 1/999999.9,
  1/999999.9
• Other modifications were needed in the PARAM file
  to make this work

?????
-?????
Disconnected cables
19
Calibration of Peter's Cerenkov
Some runs could not be calibrated SPE peak could
not be located
20
Calibration of Peter's Cerenkov
21
Cerenkov calibrations
Calibration of the other Cerenkov PMT's was more
straight forward Fit the red line by hand, while
keeping an eye on the leading edge
22
SOS calorimeter stability

• Productions runs electron -gt SOS, ? -gt HMS
• Can look at the stability of ssshtrk ESCAL /
  PSOS 1 for electrons
• The peak was fit with a Gaussian to find the mean
  and sigma

23
SOS calorimeter stability
ssshtrk mean vs. run number July and December
running periods
24
pass1 status

• DBASE is finished and can be modified easily with
  the c program to include combinations of pass1
  and pass0
• Calibration of the Cerenkov's were done with the
  red line- finished
• Calibration of the hodoscopes are finished and
  checked
• Calibration of the drift chambers are finished
  and checked
• Calibration of the SOS calorimeter was finished,
  but some runs did not calibrate well needs a
  little more work
• Typical results ?hsbeta0.034, ?ssbeta0.029,
  ?cointime 0.21-0.22ns

25
pass1 SOS calorimeter calibration
Some runs did not calibrate well I solved this
problem in the past by using previous good
calibrations and/or tweaking the coeff's by hand
26
Calibration issues

• HMS hodoscope poor resolution problem done(?)
• Flaky hodoscope PMT's done
• Hodoscope timing instability (already discussed)
• SOS wide start time peak needs work
• Gas Cerenkov pedestal problem needs work
• Noisy and/or flaky calorimeter PMT's done
• Single run had strange calorimeter dependence on
  ? needs work

27
Hhodo poor resolution problem
AFTER
BEFORE
28
Hhodo poor resolution problem

• Most important improvement was to turn off paddle
  2Y05 when beta is fit in h_tof.f
• This improvement has now been incorporated in the
  ENGINE using a new param file hdeadhodo.param
• Another important improvement was to lower the
  minph coefficients in the hhodo.param file (this
  helped the SOS also)
• Along the way,

• Made a macro to fit new phc coefficients
• Modified phchms_offset.f to be more robust when
  fitting time offsets (use median, etc.)
• Modified phchms_offset.f to iterate paddle offsets

29
Hhodo poor resolution problem

• The HMS beta resolution (?0.034) still lags
  behind the SOS (?0.029)
• A suggestion was to check the source of the
  'outlying' events

hsy_scin1
hsbeta
30
Hhodo poor resolution problem
fp - 250cm
fp - 750cm

• 'Outlying' events selected
• Plots of hsx vs. hsy
• No obvious source of these events

fp 250cm
fp - 0cm
31
Flaky hodoscope PMT's

• We ran ½ of the December running period with
  h1X11- off due to a voltage card problem
• In addition s2Y2- was flaky during runs
  49942-50032
• Both of these did not cause problems and were
  included in the hdeadhodo.param file
• The HV on the channel h1X11- drifted by up to
  100V, but there was no observable effect - this
  channel was not excluded

32
SOS wide start time peak

• Is this just a measure of a constant delay?
• Need to determine if this will be a problem

33
Gas Cerenkov pedestal problem

• The analyzer uses the mean of the entire
  histogram to calculate the pedestal
• The pedestal is used to calculate the number of
  photoelectrons
• The shift in the pedestal shown will reduce the
  number of photo-electrons by 0.1
• Problem for both the HMS and SOS
• Could be rate dependent and could be fixed by
  using the median or using cuts when calculating
  the pedestal (future work)

34
Noisy/flaky calorimeter channels

• HMS D1 was noisy and A1- had no events all of
  July
• SOS A2 and D7 also had problems during
  49599-49918
• Made h(s)deadcal.param files that will exclude
  these PMT's during calibration
• This sets the coefficients for these PMT's to zero

35
Scal delta dependence

• Only seen on a single run
• Not sure what the problem is yet
• I was on shift at the time, the thresholds were
  updated on the next run
• It may also be safe to ignore this problem

36
SOS optics check

• ytar
• Angles xptar, yptar
• Delta
• xptar vs. W

37
SOS ytar

• PSOS -1.2 GeV, default matrix
• Mean of peaks are 0.17cm from the surveyed
  positions

38
SOS ytar
PSOS -1.43 GeV Default matrix
PSOS -1.2 GeV 900MeV matrix
39
SOS angles xptar, yptar

• Optics data at 1.43 GeV
• Analyzed using the default matrix
• Carbon z0 target

40
SOS delta

• July delta scan at 1.4GeV
• Default matrix with saturation correction
• Low statistics due to large inelastic background
• Plot shows central delta of each scan (black
  line)
• Data is expanded by a factor of 100 at each
  setting
• ?? 0.25

41
SOS xptar vs. W

• Elastic data, default matrix

1.59 GeV, 50 deg
1.72 GeV, 50deg
42
SOS xptar vs. mmx

• xptar vs W looks good, however, we can also
  monitor this with e-? hydrogen data
• There is some dependence in the SOS, but not too
  bad

HMS 3.2 GeV, 16.5 deg
SOS -1.7 GeV, 28.9 deg
43
SOS optics optimization

• Optics data at 1.2 GeV
• Analyzed using the existing 900MeV matrix

44
SOS optics optimization

• New matrix at 1200MeV
• Previously, ytar optimization failed
• Angle optimization (xptar and yptar) also failed

45
HMS optics check

• No running time was devoted to checking the HMS
  optics
• The last run of a BPM check can be used if the
  beam is in the final position
• This uses the carbon z0 target with the raster
  off
• ytar (z0)
• Angles xptar, yptar

46
HMS ytar check

• Run 52417, BPM was good
• PHMS3.59GeV, ?HMS18.00
• Carbon z0 target
• ytar diff 0.04cm

47
HMS angle check
Run 52417 Carbon z0 target
48
HMS optics optimization
Tanja's work (Fpi-2)

• HMS optics data using the quintar carbon target
  (-7cm to 8cm)
• HMS central momentum 1.7GeV, angle 18.00
• Sieve collimator was shifted vertically by /-
  half a row (1.3cm) to better cover the pion
  collimator acceptance
• Cuts were made on the sieve holes, delta, ytar,
  and Cerenkov
• Compare measured xptar vs. calculated xptar (out
  of plane angle)
• New matrix elements appear to do a better job,
  but still needs some work (eg correlation at
  large ytar)

49
Tanja's work (Fpi-2)

• Default HMS Matrix
• PHMS 1.7 GeV
• ?CT production data gt 2 GeV

50
Tanja's work (Fpi-2)

• New HMS Matrix
• Overall offset due to beam position
• Corrections of less than 1mr

51
Tanja's work (Fpi-2)

• New HMS Matrix
• Correlation at ztarg 7.9 cm
• Worse for the default matrix

52
Summary

• Pass 0 and stability checks done
• Pass 1 and calibration checks almost done (SOS
  calorimeter needs some more work)
• Optics are in good shape(?), but could be better
• SOS optimization will be performed at 1.2GeV
• Tanja has optimized the HMS matrix at 1.7GeV, but
  this still needs some work

53
END
54
Optics

• During production running, ytar reconstruction
  can be monitored using dummy and carbon z0
  targets
• Red surveyed foil position Black measured
  position
• Run 49540 Default
  matrices SOS Chuncheng corrections
  PHMS 3.2GeV ?HMS 13.40 PSOS -1.7GeV
  ?HMS 28.90

55
ztar reconstruction
Run zfoil PHMS zHMS ?ytar PSOS zSOS ?ytar 49547
-1.75 3.2 -1.84 0.22 -1.7 -1.92 0.11 49540
0.25 3.2 0.25 0.23 -1.7 0.1
0.13 49547 2.25 3.2 2.15 0.19
-1.7 2.18 0.14 49892 -1.75 3.2 -1.68 0.23
-0.73 -1.91 0.14 49882 0.25 3.2 0.13 0.23
-0.73 0.11 0.18 49892 2.25 3.2 2.34 0.22
-0.73 2.1 0.19 49944 -1.75 2.8 -1.39 0.29
-1.2 -1.94 0.13 49959 0.25 2.8 0.3 0.27
-1.2 0.09 0.15 49944 2.25 2.8 2.26 0.25
-1.2 2.09 0.17 50018 -1.75 2.1 -1.69
0.24 50021 0.25 2.1 0.28 0.27 50018
2.25 2.1 2.26 0.21
Production runs Raster on
Previous results from Mark Jones for ?ytar HMS
0.2cm, SOS 0.09-0.11cm