Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sphenix-maps-l - Re: [Sphenix-maps-l] Next Meeting of the Inner Tracker Task Force

sphenix-maps-l AT lists.bnl.gov

Subject: sPHENIX MAPS tracker discussion

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Christof Roland <christof.roland AT cern.ch>
  • To: Ming Liu <ming AT bnl.gov>
  • Cc: "Chiu, Mickey" <chiu AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>, "Todoroki, Takahito" <todoroki AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>, sphenix-maps-l <sphenix-maps-l AT lists.bnl.gov>, Molly Taylor <mitay AT mit.edu>
  • Subject: Re: [Sphenix-maps-l] Next Meeting of the Inner Tracker Task Force
  • Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 21:36:14 +0200

Hi Ming, 

coming back to the original question. 

To determine how many hits the INTT needs to provide we still have two topic to evaluate:

1) the pileup rejection in the seed vertexing step (pp)

2) the extrapolation accuracy to the TPC for calibration purposes

To evaluate both points we still need new software to be written, so this will still take some time untill we get solid results. We expect first results to become available end of this week or early next and allowing for an iteration or two we should know how many INTT hits are needed in about 2 weeks.

Once we know the number of hits needed we will fold in dead channel and redundancy considerations and define the final layer number and layout. The most likely answer based on our current knowledge will be between 2 or 3 layers, as you correctly pionted out.

Cheers

   Christof 





On 26. Sep 2018, at 16:58, Ming Liu <ming AT bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Christof, Tony and all,
 
What is the status of evaluating the impact of INTT on vertex seeding in high rate p+p/p+A collisions? It seems this is pretty much the last major item to be resolved to address the recent MVTX review committee’s recommendations:
 
You have already made excellent progress with tracking simulations and showed that:
  1. For the global tracking, MVTX+TPC is already showing excellent rejection of pileups in pp collisions, INTT seems not contributing much for further rejection power.   
  2. Tracking efficiency seems very similar for 2/3/4 layers of INTT.
  3. Di-electron mass resolution prefers less INTT layers (or less mass in general)
 
To me, it seems 2-layer (or 3-layer for high efficiency) INTT already sufficient and preferred for better Upsilon resolutions.
 
Cheers,
Ming
-- 
Ming Xiong Liu
P-25, MS H846                 TEL: 505-667-7125(Office) 
Physics Division                        631-344-7821(BNL)
LANL                                           630-840-5708(FNAL)
Los Alamos, NM 87545  FAX: 505-665-7020
 
From: sPHENIX-MAPS-l <sphenix-maps-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov> on behalf of Christof Roland <christof.roland AT cern.ch>
Date: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 7:21 PM
To: Jin Huang <jhuang AT bnl.gov>
Cc: Mickey Chiu <chiu AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>, sPHENIX-INTT <sphenix-intt-l AT lists.bnl.gov>, Sanghoon Lim <sanghoon.lim AT colorado.edu>, Molly Taylor <mitay AT mit.edu>, sphenix-maps-l <sphenix-maps-l AT lists.bnl.gov>, Takahiro Todoroki <todoroki AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>
Subject: [Sphenix-maps-l] Next Meeting of the Inner Tracker Task Force
 
Hi Everybody,
 
tomorrow we will have the next meeting of the Inner Tracker Task Force. 
The indico page, bluejeans link and google doc can be found here:
 
 
 
 
See you tomorrow!
 
   Christof 
_______________________________________________ sPHENIX-MAPS-l mailing list sPHENIX-MAPS-l AT lists.bnl.gov https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-maps-l




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page