SLAC PEP-II
BABAR
SLAC<->RAL
Babar logo
HEPIC E,S & H Databases PDG HEP preprints
Organization Detector Computing Physics Documentation
Personnel Glossary Sitemap Search Hypernews
Unwrap page!
Det. Search
Who's who?
Meetings
FAQ
Images
Archive
Systems
Performance
Intern. region
Vertex Tracker
Drift chamber
DIRC
Calorimeter
IFR
LST
Magnet
Electronics
Trigger
Operations
Run Coordination
Contact Experts
Shift Takers Info
Operations Manual
Electronic Logbook
Ops Hypernews
Shift Signup
Check this page for HTML 4.01 Transitional compliance with the
W3C Validator
(More checks...)

IFR R14 vs Converted-SP5/SP6 Data/MC Comparisons


R12 vs SP5 Data/MC Comparisons


This page contains data/MC comparison plots made using a muon control sample (BtamumugamaSample in the BetaPidCalib package) taken from the R14 data and converted SP5/SP6 mu-pair events from the "e+e- -> mu+mu-gamma (KK2F)" samples. Both data and MC are required to pass the BetaPidCalib selector for consistency. The muon tracks selected are unbiased with respect to PID information from the IFR and EMC. The MC is divided into monthly blocks determined by the CONDALIAS with which it was generated. It is compared with data taken from runs only during the same period that the MC is intended to simulate.


Muon Track Comparisons

The first set of plots show comparisons (for each muon track) of:
  • Track polar angle in the lab frame
  • Track momentum in the lab frame
  • associated EMC energy
  • number IFR layers hit
  • number of 1D clusters associted with the track
  • number of 1D clusters divided by the number of layers hit (expect 2 in general, 1 per view)
  • number of fired strips associated to the track
  • first layer hit by the track
  • last layer hit by the track
  • last layer hit by the track in the barrel
  • measured number of interaction lengths traversed (lambda)
  • expected number of interaction length traversed
  • delta lambda (measured-expected interaction lengths)
  • number of interaction length traversed before reaching IFR
  • continuity ((last layer hit - first layer hit) /total layers hit)
  • cluster fit chi2/dof
  • track match chi2/dof
  • number of degrees of freedom of the track match chi2
  • total number of strips fired divided by the number of layers hit
  • standard deviation of the distribution of number of strips fired per layer
  • highest passed muon ID (micro Selector) (minI=1, veryLoose=2,loose=3,tight=4,veryTight=5)
  • highest passed muon ID (NN Eff Selector) (minI=1, veryLoose=2,loose=3,tight=4,veryTight=5)
  • highest passed muon ID (NN Fake Rate Selector) (minI=1, veryLoose=2,loose=3,tight=4,veryTight=5)
  • number of components making up the IFR cluster (~number of IFR sectors traversed by track)
  • number of 2DClusters making up the IFR cluster (~2 x number of IFR sectors traversed by track)
Each page shows four plots which are (i) tracks with hits in forward EC only (ii) tracks with hits in forward EC and barrel (iii) tracks with hits in barrel only (iv) tracks with hits in backward EC and possibly barrel. The histogram is MC and the points are data. The plots are normalized to the same area.

Run1:

February 2000 March 2000 April 2000 May 2000 June 2000 July 2000 August 2000 September 2000 October 2000

Run2:

February 2001 March 2001 April 2001 May 2001 June 2001 July 2001 August 2001 September 2001 October 2001 November 2001 January 2002 February 2002 March 2002 May 2002 June 2002

Run3:

February 2003 April 2003 June 2003

Run4:

September 2003 October 2003 November 2003 December 2003 January 2004 February 2004 March 2004 April 2004 May 2004 June 2004 July 2004

Muon ID Efficiency Comparisons

Using the same data described above, the following plots attempt to determine where the discrepancies in muon ID efficiency originate. For each month and for each region of the IFR defined above (FWD, Overlap, Barrel, BWD), we plot the efficiency to pass each of the cuts in the veryTight micro selector as a fuction of track momentum. The cut being applied is listed on each plot. The blue is MC while the black is data. The last two pages show the efficiency to pass all previously plotted cuts and the efficiency to pass the veryTight selection. These two should be identical (but in fact there are some small differences). It's just a cross-check to make sure my cuts in ROOT are the same as those actually applied by the selector.

Run1:

February 2000 March 2000 April 2000 May 2000 June 2000 July 2000 August 2000 September 2000 October 2000

Run2:

February 2001 March 2001 May 2001 June 2001 July 2001 August 2001 September 2001 October 2001 November 2001 January 2002 February 2002 March 2002 May 2002 June 2002

Run3:

February 2003 April 2003 June 2003

Run4:

September 2003 October 2003 November 2003 December 2003 January 2004 February 2004 March 2004 April 2004 May 2004 June 2004 July 2004
Page Maintainer(s): Thomas B. Moore
Page Creator(s): Thomas B. Moore
Last significant update: February-28-2005 Expiry date: JAN-01-2005