Epic-backward-hcal-l mailing list

["Brandenburg, Daniel" <brandenburg.89 AT osu.edu>]

Hi Sasha,

 

This is excellent, thanks for the additional work on this. These are much easier to interpret.

 

Best,

Daniel Brandenburg

Assistant Professor

College of Arts and Sciences

Department of Physics

Ohio State University

 

 

From: Prozorov, Alexandr <alexandr.prozorov AT cvut.cz>
Date: Wednesday, May 28, 2025 at 7:34 AM
To: Riedl, Caroline <criedl AT illinois.edu>, Corey, Sam <corey.90 AT buckeyemail.osu.edu>, epic-backward-hcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov <epic-backward-hcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov>, Brandenburg, Daniel <brandenburg.89 AT osu.edu>, Lisa, Mike <lisa AT physics.osu.edu>, Leszek Kosarzewski <leszek.kosarzewski AT gmail.com>, Stefaniak, Maria <stefaniak.9 AT osu.edu>, Khyzhniak, Yevheniia <khyzhniak.1 AT buckeyemail.osu.edu>
Subject: Re: nHCal - preparations for DAC review

Hello Caroline, here is the attached plot with fits . I have now fitted it with different function and included uncertainty from fit(not visible under markers). There are 4 needed plots in selected_plots. pdf Preview for mail only: With best

Hello Caroline, here is the attached plot with fits .
 I have now fitted it with different function and included uncertainty from fit(not visible under markers).

There are 4 needed plots in selected_plots.pdf

Preview for mail only:

With best wishes, Sasha

---

From: Riedl, Caroline <criedl AT illinois.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, 28 May 2025 00:32
To: Corey, Sam <corey.90 AT buckeyemail.osu.edu>; epic-backward-hcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov <epic-backward-hcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov>; Brandenburg, Daniel <brandenburg.89 AT osu.edu>; Lisa, Mike <lisa AT physics.osu.edu>; Leszek Kosarzewski <leszek.kosarzewski AT gmail.com>; Stefaniak, Maria <stefaniak.9 AT osu.edu>; Khyzhniak, Yevheniia <khyzhniak.1 AT buckeyemail.osu.edu>; Prozorov, Alexandr <alexandr.prozorov AT cvut.cz>
Cc: Riedl, Caroline <criedl AT illinois.edu>
Subject: Re: nHCal - preparations for DAC review

 

Hi Sam,

 

Many thanks, this is GREAT! 

 

I'll continue tuning the message, for now attaching the screenshot of the current DAC slide. Any comments are welcome. 

 

Best,

Caroline

 

⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯

Caroline Riedl
Research Professor

UIUC

---

From: Corey, Sam <corey.90 AT buckeyemail.osu.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2025 4:03 PM
To: Riedl, Caroline <criedl AT illinois.edu>; epic-backward-hcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov <epic-backward-hcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov>; Brandenburg, Daniel <brandenburg.89 AT osu.edu>; Lisa, Mike <lisa AT physics.osu.edu>; Leszek Kosarzewski <leszek.kosarzewski AT gmail.com>; Stefaniak, Maria <stefaniak.9 AT osu.edu>; Khyzhniak, Yevheniia <khyzhniak.1 AT buckeyemail.osu.edu>; Prozorov, Alexandr <alexandr.prozorov AT cvut.cz>
Subject: Re: nHCal - preparations for DAC review

 

Hi Caroline, all,

 

I attached a zip file containing a bunch of plots with different combinations of configurations, as well as plots showing the difference between each configuration and the default.

 

I also caught a bug on my end that effected our conversation earlier-the 20 layer, 2cm absorber, 8cm scintillator configurations were missing from the plot. This is quite important because these are the configurations with the highest efficiency. The conclusions we can draw from this are:

 

1. 5x5 cm vs. 10x10 cm tiles do not make a huge difference, but 10x10 is slightly higher efficiency
2. Increasing the number of layers increases the efficiency. Going from 10 to 15 layers while keeping all else the same increases the efficiency by about 5% for 1 GeV neutrons.
3. Increasing the amount of scintillator compared to the amount of absorber causes the largest change in efficiency.  For neutrons around 0.5 GeV, with 20 layers, 2cm absorber, going from 4mm scintillator to 8mm scintillator increases the efficiency by nearly 20%.

 

The scintillator/absorber ratio causes the most change in efficiency. The least efficient configurations have r=0.1, and the most efficient has 0.4. The LFHCal-like configuration (1.52 cm absorber, 25 layers) has r=0.26, and the 20 layer options with 4mm and 8mm scintillator have r=0.2 and 0.4 respectively.

 

Sorry I missed this in my first pass at the plots!

 

Thanks everyone,

Sam

 

This might have ended up being a duplicate email; I’m not sure the one I sent to just the list went through for some reason.

 

 

From: epic-backward-hcal-l-request AT lists.bnl.gov <epic-backward-hcal-l-request AT lists.bnl.gov> on behalf of Riedl, Caroline <criedl AT illinois.edu>
Date: Tuesday, May 27, 2025 at 11:51 AM
To: epic-backward-hcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov <epic-backward-hcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov>, Brandenburg, Daniel <brandenburg.89 AT osu.edu>, Lisa, Mike <lisa AT physics.osu.edu>, Leszek Kosarzewski <leszek.kosarzewski AT gmail.com>, Stefaniak, Maria <stefaniak.9 AT osu.edu>, Khyzhniak, Yevheniia <khyzhniak.1 AT buckeyemail.osu.edu>, Prozorov, Alexandr <alexandr.prozorov AT cvut.cz>
Subject: [[Epic-backward-hcal-l] ] nHCal - preparations for DAC review

Dear colleagues, in particular those who prepare(d) plots for the DAC review, I uploaded a new version of the DAC slides to today's nHCal indico, https: //indico. bnl. gov/event/28192/. Because of the ongoing rehearsal sessions for the DAC review,

Dear colleagues, in particular those who prepare(d) plots for the DAC review,

 

I uploaded a new version of the DAC slides to today's nHCal indico, https://indico.bnl.gov/event/28192/.

 

Because of the ongoing rehearsal sessions for the DAC review, my time in today's nHCal meeting will be limited, and I would like to get my message to you across ahead of time. To save time, I wrote down my questions and comments below. It would be great if you could clarify my questions (in the meeting or by email) and send updated material as quickly as possible - ideally by tomorrow morning. The rehearsal of the talk will be around 11:00 ET tomorrow (May 28).  The slides have to be in final shape ~ next Monday (June 2). 

 

• Leszek - sampling fractions (thanks for the update!) 

• What is the takeaway message? Are we satisfied with the 1-1.5% sampling fraction? What is the target? In other words, do we expect with the thickest considered design version (45cm --> 68cm) to move it closer to the desired target, or is 1-1.5% enough already? 

• Sam - neutron efficiency 

• What is the takeaway message? What are we satisfied with? Is it acceptable that the efficiency starts plateauing only at 2 GeV? 

• How were the individual data points acquired? I.e., for a given energy, how did you calculate the efficiency? 

• When will additional plots for different geometries be available? 

• Transverse position resolution - Alexandr 

• Takeaway message: "position resolution rather insensitive to tile size" --> OK?

• How were the individual data points acquired? I.e., for a given neutron energy, how did you obtain / calculate the quantity Delta R_xy? What is then shown is the mean of this distribution and the uncertainty is the standard. deviation. It would be nice to show 1-2 examples of this distribution! Could you provide such kind of plots? The goal should be to demonstrate what this plot can show, and what it can't. 

•  Check the data point at 0.5 GeV 20x20 - why is it fluctuating?

• What significance does the plot “interacted events” have? Do we need to show it?

• OSU lab tests - Yevheniia and Maria 

• Please check the one slide with this content

• Can you provide a rough time line of when what can be accomplished? (by week or at least month) 

 

Many thanks!

Caroline

 

 

⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯

Caroline Riedl
Research Professor

UIUC

---

From: epic-backward-hcal-l-request AT lists.bnl.gov <epic-backward-hcal-l-request AT lists.bnl.gov> on behalf of Leszek Kosarzewski <leszek.kosarzewski AT gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2025 12:13 AM
To: epic-backward-hcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov <epic-backward-hcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov>; Brandenburg, Daniel <brandenburg.89 AT osu.edu>; Lisa, Michael <lisa AT physics.osu.edu>
Subject: Re: [[Epic-backward-hcal-l] ] nHCal DSC meeting tomorrow at 1400h BNL time

 

Dear Colleagues

 

I calculated the sampling fraction for neutrons and pi- (and comparison) vs. kinetic energy. I used the default geometry and uploaded the plots here:

 

https://indico.bnl.gov/event/28192/#1-dsl-report

 

Best regards, Leszek

 

wt., 27 maj 2025 o 05:26 Leszek Kosarzewski <leszek.kosarzewski AT gmail.com> napisał(a):

Dear Colleagues

 

I updated the analysis codes with the correct method for sampling fraction calculation:

 

https://github.com/lkosarz/HCalGeomStudy

 

I'm running the jobs, so I'll have results soon.

 

Best regards, Leszek

 

wt., 27 maj 2025 o 00:59 Leszek Kosarzewski <leszek.kosarzewski AT gmail.com> napisał(a):

Dear Colleagues

 

We are going to have a backward HCal DSC meeting tomorrow at 1400h BNL time. See the meeting link below:

 

https://indico.bnl.gov/event/28192/

 

The plan is to continue discussing the slides for DAC meeting and give other updates. I'm going to fly back to USA during the time of the meeting so I can't connect, but Daniel will send a new Zoom link this time.

 

Best regards, Leszek