sPHENIX HCal discussion

[Rosi Reed <rjr215 AT lehigh.edu>]

Hi Raghav,

That looks very nice!  I would definitely be interested in what these distributions look like with Chris's fix to the hcal geometry.

One request, I am not as young as I once was, can you change either the green or the cyan to either kGreen+1 or kCyan+1?  I had to stare at the plot for a while before I found the missing point!

Could you plot the ratio of the jes and jer/jes of varation/steel hcalin?  That could help put things into perspective.

So as before, it seems just a slow degradation in performance for inclusive jets, and while quark jets seem to do a bit better than gluon jets, it doesn't look tremendously different.  This indicates to me that being able to differentiate quark vs gluon isn't going to change that much with these different choices.

Another thing I would like to see would be the jet finding efficiency, are we losing more jets with the "worse" scenarios?  Keep the matching criteria loose (I'm assuming you're using dR = R).

How are you at unfolding toy models?  Maybe take raw pythia, use the jes/jer to smear it, build the RM, and then unfold it for R = 0.4 for steel hcalin and just the steel frame (i.e. the best and worst choices).  What this could show is how much worse it could be, because I think you bring up a very salient point!!

Thank you for all of this great work, it's really important.

Cheers,

Rosi

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Raghav Kunnawalkam Elayavalli <kunnawalkamraghav AT gmail.com> wrote:

Hi All, 

I attached a set of slides to this email that looks at the different HCALIN descoping scenarios and their impact on the jet energy scale and resolution for a variety of jet radii (R = 0.2, 0.3 and 0.4). I included the case of having a 5in steel frame as well. 

Building of my previous set of plots, I looked at the impact of the resolution for quark vs gluons jets in a pT range 15-60 GeV. We see that the degradation in the resolution is quite similar to the inclusive sample, with quark-jets similar to inclusive at high pT and gluon-jets similar to inclusive at low pT. 

I also added some rudimentary detector level corrections on the jet pT (by just fitting the response as shown in slide 5) and the effect on the resolution is quite minimal for both inclusive and for quark vs gluon jets. 

Im also hoping to have some additional plots that study the fragmentation (and the high z part; statistics pertaining) and the jet shapes. 

Note: These plots are not with the latest hcal updates from Chris and Im currently running some jobs now that will compare the two.  

 

Cheers

Raghav 

**************************************

Raghav Kunnawalkam Elayavalli

PhD, Rutgers University

SRN-206W 

136 Frelinghyusen Rd.

Piscataway NJ 

office: +1 848 445 8769

cell : +1 732 532 9232  

**************************************

On Oct 2, 2017, at 12:33 PM, John Lajoie <lajoie AT iastate.edu> wrote:

Hi Dennis,

    I'd like to have some additional statistics of your ">50 GeV, R=0.4 jet in |eta|<0.6" jet sample to have a look at high-z fragmentation.  Would it be possible for you to generate some additional hepmc files?  A factor of 2-4 would be good, 10 would be great.   I don't need the G4 simulations as I will run them through my analysis code, just the hepmc files.

John

On 9/11/2017 6:07 PM, Perepelitsa, Dennis wrote:

Dear sPHENIX Jet Structure and HCal teams (and in particular John L., Aaron, Songkyo, Raghav),

As we agreed at the HCal meeting last week, we have begun coordinating the production of simulation jobs to investigate the sensitivity of the jet response (especially as a function of fragmentation pattern) to different Inner HCal scenarios.

I have run a set of 10k Pythia QCD hard scattering events with the requirement of a >50 GeV, R=0.4 jet in |eta|<0.6. A full G4 simulation and then standard (pp) jet reconstruction were performed under three scenarios: (1) the default IHCal description, (2) an Al-material IHCal, and (3) an Al-material IHCal which is not read out (this is implemented as tower reco jets not being given the HCALIN_TOWER container as an input to jet reconstruction in G4_Jets.C ).

The input Pythia8 HepMC files are here: /sphenix/user/dvp/gen/QCD35/

My G4 setup is here: /phenix/upgrades/decadal/dvp/production-IHCal/macros/macros/g4simulations/ 

At this point, I have not kept the resulting G4 hits files, but have rather “tree-ified” the results using a simple TreeMaker class you can find here: /direct/phenix+upgrades/decadal/dvp/production-IHCal/src/ . The trees store the (pt/eta/phi) for truth and tower-reco jets for R=0.2,0.3,0.4,0.5 cone sizes, as well as the pt/eta/phi/particle-ID of all final-state truth particles. A few comments here:

1. R=0.5 is a somewhat larger cone size than we normally look at, but I included it for completeness so analyzers can study the jet R-dependence of these different scenarios.
2. The final-state truth particles are included so that analyzers can also study the fragmentation pattern (for example, max-z) dependence. 
3. I think we have been wanting a “standard” tree-maker AKA ntuple-dumper like this for a while — we should flesh this out and formally add it to git soon.

Anyway, I have compiled the resulting output trees, which should have 10k events each, here: 

/sphenix/user/dvp/sims/sPHENIX-Sep17-QCD35-10k-DefaultIHCal.root
/sphenix/user/dvp/sims/sPHENIX-Sep17-QCD35-10k-AlIHCal.root           
/sphenix/user/dvp/sims/sPHENIX-Sep17-QCD35-10k-AlIHCalNoReadout.root

I would strongly and warmly encourage Aaron, Songkyo, Raghav and any other interested parties to please take a look at the setup and the resulting output trees. (I know that the Colorado group is planning to have a look at these outputs and try to produce some initial plots for the simulations meeting tomorrow, but it is highly preferable that this is not the only group doing so.)

Actually, I know that Raghav has taken the lead and run some initial simulations of his own — I attach some slides from him here which briefly summarize those studies. In the near future, it would be great to check that we are getting consistent answers in the region where our simulations overlap.

Depending on how the first studies turn out, we are happy to coordinate an additional production (including “tree-ification”) with HIJING embedding and a more extensive pT range, also in the near future.

All are welcome and encouraged to take a look,

Dennis

Dennis V. Perepelitsa
Assistant Professor, Physics Department
University of Colorado Boulder

_______________________________________________
sPHENIX-HCal-l mailing list
sPHENIX-HCal-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-hcal-l

--

John Lajoie

Professor of Physics

Iowa State University

 

(515) 294-6952

lajoie AT iastate.edu

Contact me: john.lajoie

_______________________________________________
sPHENIX-HCal-l mailing list
sPHENIX-HCal-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-hcal-l

_______________________________________________
sPHENIX-HCal-l mailing list
sPHENIX-HCal-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-hcal-l

--

Rosi Reed

Assistant Professor, Physics Department

Lehigh University
(610)758-3907

16 Memorial Drive East Office 406

Bethlehem, PA 18015