Epic-backward-hcal-l mailing list

["Riedl, Caroline" <criedl AT illinois.edu>]

Hi Leszek and all,

The tricky part is that the centrally available productions and thus the data analyzed by me don't have muons as final state. (I know this should change but it's what we have now...) I do have Vincent's plot from the standalone simulation. It shows pT and not p, and only a distribution and not an average. I have his root trees and code and will try to extract a momentum from them tomorrow. If this fails, I'll quote the pT range on the slide.

I attach screenshots of the current slide layouts - slides 2 and 3 (new).

I'll send a new full set of slides tomorrow as soon as I can.

Best,

Caroline

⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯

Caroline Riedl
Research Professor

UIUC

---

From: Leszek Kosarzewski <leszek.kosarzewski AT gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2025 1:41 PM
To: Riedl, Caroline <criedl AT illinois.edu>
Cc: Prozorov, Alexandr <alexandr.prozorov AT cvut.cz>; 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>; Stefaniak, Maria <stefaniak.9 AT osu.edu>; Khyzhniak, Yevheniia <khyzhniak.1 AT buckeyemail.osu.edu>
Subject: Re: nHCal - preparations for DAC review

 

Hi Caroline

The muons are missing, yes, but I think what's really relevant is the muons originating from vector meson decays rather than inclusive muons. I see only several entries in nHCal acceptance, so I don't think DIS events are useful here. It would be good if you can get it from your simulation.

Best regards, Leszek

śr., 28 maj 2025 o 14:34 Riedl, Caroline <criedl AT illinois.edu> napisał(a):

Hi Leszek,

Thanks - I included the momentum distribution from the pre-TDR. Unfortunately there are no muons included in the figure. Looking at my own studies from last year, this is likely because there are relatively few muons in that simulation (but some, see attached plot). I'll try to create a momentum distribution from them in the eta nHCal acceptance. 

Best,

Caroline

⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯

Caroline Riedl
Research Professor

UIUC

---

From: Leszek Kosarzewski <leszek.kosarzewski AT gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2025 11:45 AM
To: Prozorov, Alexandr <alexandr.prozorov AT cvut.cz>
Cc: 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>; Stefaniak, Maria <stefaniak.9 AT osu.edu>; Khyzhniak, Yevheniia <khyzhniak.1 AT buckeyemail.osu.edu>
Subject: Re: nHCal - preparations for DAC review

 

Hi Caroline and All

We got a few suggestions during the page turn and I can provide answers and material:

We were asked to provide the initial distributions for neutrons from DIS events to judge the energy range. We checked this for primary particles and the plots are in preTDR (see our standalone version):

https://www.overleaf.com/project/66f1bcf6b7a86bd1dea06a4a

Figure 8.5 contains these for total energy and momentum. Let me know if you need a better version or a separate distribution for neutrons.

Best regards, Leszek

śr., 28 maj 2025 o 12:01 Leszek Kosarzewski <leszek.kosarzewski AT gmail.com> napisał(a):

Hi Sam, Caroline and All

Very good! About the integration time. That would be the first question we’d be asked.

That's a huge improvement in the description of deltaR distributions and the resolution looks much more smooth vs. energy and tile size and stable.

The slides look great! Good luck to Caroline. I'm connected to the meeting.

Best regards, Leszek

śr., 28 maj 2025 o 11:56 Prozorov, Alexandr <alexandr.prozorov AT cvut.cz> napisał(a):

Hi Leszek,

The change was the fit Reiglegh+Exponential tale instead of StandardDeviation (RMS)

The data files are the same.

Sasha

28 мая 2025 г. 17:37 пользователь Leszek Kosarzewski <leszek.kosarzewski AT gmail.com> написал:

Hi Caroline, Sam, Sasha

I had a look at the updates and have a few comments.

The integration time for the neutron efficiency calculation is too long. The 1000 ns time means multiple bunch crossings. I think 100 ns is more realistic, this means 4x25 ns time bins of the HGCROC. I also see that indeed more frequent sampling, still with thicker 8 mm scintillators (2 cm steel) looks the best.

What is the update for the position resolution that affected the results compared to the last one? I didn't connect to the meeting because I was flying. What was the reason? Is it due to the bug I mentioned long time ago? The plots look indeed much better.

Best regards, Leszek

śr., 28 maj 2025 o 11:20 Prozorov, Alexandr <alexandr.prozorov AT cvut.cz> napisał(a):

Hi Caroline,
 here is the plot(attached .pdf) with a macro producing it. You can change if needed. 

Here is preview (for mail only)

Regards,
Sasha

---

From: Riedl, Caroline <criedl AT illinois.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, 28 May 2025 16:10
To: Prozorov, Alexandr <alexandr.prozorov AT cvut.cz>; 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>; Riedl, Caroline <criedl AT illinois.edu>
Subject: Re: nHCal - preparations for DAC review

 

Hi Sasha,

Excellent, thank you! The histograms fits make it very clear. May I suggest one more thing - in addition to the individual histograms with the fits, is it possible you make two plots without fits, but with two histograms in the same panel: a) same energy, different tile size; b) same tile size, different energy. Then one will be able to directly see from the widths of the distributions what changes. (It is OK if you can't do it that quickly - it would just be a different visualization. The material I have now is excellent.) 

I am sending a screenshot of the current slide. 

I learned this morning that the deadline for final slides was anticipated to Friday noon ET. This means no more changes possible afterwards; then the slides will be distributed to the external reviewers. The latest I will be able to apply changes is before Friday 10:00 (since then I'll be in a PhD defense).

Best,

Caroline

⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯

Caroline Riedl
Research Professor

UIUC

---

From: Prozorov, Alexandr <alexandr.prozorov AT cvut.cz>
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2025 6:33 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 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

Attachment: Screenshot 2025-05-28 at 5.26.29 PM.png
Description: Screenshot 2025-05-28 at 5.26.29 PM.png

Attachment: Screenshot 2025-05-28 at 5.27.13 PM.png
Description: Screenshot 2025-05-28 at 5.27.13 PM.png