GSI Forum: EMC » EMC resolution

Home » PANDA » PandaRoot » EMC » EMC resolution

Show: Today's Messages :: Polls :: Message Navigator

Re: EMC resolution [message #15871 is a reply to message #15567]

Thu, 13 February 2014 15:16

binsong
Messages: 10
Registered: December 2011

occasional visitor

From: *in2p3.fr

Dear all,

now the problem is clear. it is due to the nonuniformity.

To obtain a realistic resolution (validated by the PROTO60 results),
simulations must be done using following parameters in all.par:

Use_nonuniformity:1
Use-Shaped_noise 0

The first flag needs to be set to 1 to take into account the observed
non linearity of the light yield
in the barrel EMC crystals as a function of the interaction depth.
The effect is an increase of the sigma of a Nivosibirsk fit from
1.6 (Use_nonuniformity:0 ) to 2.5 % (with Use_nonuniformity:1) for
photons at 1 GeV with a flat distribution in theta from 30 to
130 deg.

With the second flag set to 0, a more precise description of the
electronic noise is obtained, while faster but less accurate results are
obtained with the flag set to 1. The effect is an increase of the
sigma of a Novosibirsk fit from
2.2 (Use-Shaped_noise 1) to 2.5 % (Use-Shaped_noise 0) for a photon
at 1 GeV

Before end of november 2013, the standard parameters were
"Use_nonuniformity 0" and "Use-Shaped_noise 1", leading to a too
optimistic resolution, by about a factor 2. Now, the standard setting is
"Use_nonuniformity 1" and "Use-Shaped_noise 0")

The raw energy includes both effects of the non-uniformity and of the
electronic noise. The cluster calibrated energy is deduced using
calibration
parameters adjusted as a function of theta and energy to reproduce the
pi0 mass.
By default, the calibration parameter file is the one corresponding to
Use_nonuniformity:1 and "Use-Shaped_noise 0".

The two attached figures are the results for photon with the new version of pandaroot.
index.php?t=getfile&id=7696&private=0

[Updated on: Thu, 13 February 2014 16:54]

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		EMC resolution By: binsong on Fri, 11 October 2013 14:05
		Re: EMC resolution By: Dima Melnychuk on Mon, 14 October 2013 14:47
		Re: EMC resolution By: StefanoSpataro on Mon, 14 October 2013 17:29
		Re: EMC resolution By: binsong on Wed, 30 October 2013 10:50
		Re: EMC resolution By: StefanoSpataro on Wed, 30 October 2013 14:57
		Re: EMC resolution By: Dima Melnychuk on Wed, 30 October 2013 15:23
		Re: EMC resolution By: Ronald Kunne on Wed, 06 November 2013 11:13
		Re: EMC resolution By: Dima Melnychuk on Wed, 06 November 2013 12:35
		Re: EMC resolution By: StefanoSpataro on Wed, 06 November 2013 17:11
		Re: EMC resolution By: binsong on Fri, 15 November 2013 15:10
		Re: EMC resolution By: Dima Melnychuk on Fri, 15 November 2013 15:24
		Re: EMC resolution By: binsong on Fri, 15 November 2013 15:30
		Re: EMC resolution By: StefanoSpataro on Fri, 15 November 2013 16:23
		Re: EMC resolution By: binsong on Fri, 15 November 2013 16:30
		Re: EMC resolution By: StefanoSpataro on Fri, 15 November 2013 16:35
		Re: EMC resolution By: Dima Melnychuk on Fri, 15 November 2013 15:39
		Re: EMC resolution By: binsong on Fri, 15 November 2013 15:49
		Re: EMC resolution By: binsong on Thu, 13 February 2014 15:16
		Re: EMC resolution By: binsong on Thu, 13 February 2014 15:17

Previous Topic:	[FIXED] About negative track id -2
Next Topic:	An idea for EMC Error matix

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Fri Nov 22 04:22:33 CET 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00843 seconds