Caldet Session, Collaboration Meeting

1
Caldet Near/Far Analysis

• Results presented at NDFE Cost Schedule Review
• Only a little progress since then

2
Caldet

• 150 Channels of Near Detector Electronics
• 6 planes out of 60 on one side
• T11 Beamline from Sept. 7 Sept. 15, 2002

Time of Flight
Cerenkov
(not to scale)
3
Preliminary Caldet Electron Analysis

• Electron cuts a la Trish
• Cerenkov ADC, TOF-Cerenkov timing, max energy
  near center of plane 1, etc.
• 3 GeV/c electrons, run 31265

Near MIPs
Far MIPs
4
Caldet Electron Analysis, cont.

• Not all runs are as nice as 31265
• 2 GeV/c electrons in 31398.
• Low response events (below 20 MIPs) common to
  both sets of electronics

Near MIPs
Far MIPs
5
Linearity

• ND and FD responses track each other reasonably
  well, despite obvious problems with electron
  selection
• Not well enough typical 3 effects, with high
  statistical precision

Fractional difference
Statistical errors not shown, but much smaller
than differences
Non-containment of electrons?
6
Resolution

• Less agreement than response plot
• However, RMS is more susceptible to a handful of
  outliers
• Effects of missing plane 6 as function of
  electron energy

Electron response RMS as of response
7
Channel Correlation

• Study individual strip Near-Far response in MIPs
  
• Combine several strips for statistics
• Mostly within ?2
• There will be different threshold effects between
  the ND and FD in lowest bin

(ND-FD)/.5(NDFD)
2 PEs or less in 1st bin
(ndfd)/2 in PEs
8
Channel Correlation, cont.

• Test is s(ND-FD) consistent with photostatistics?

Expectation
(ND-FD)/expected error
Observed RMS
20 difference is to be expected due to
secondary emission statistic - comparison
looks reasonable
Ratio of observed over expected RMS
MIPs
9
Looking at Channel Differences

• Can we study features in Near-Far in QIE space?
• Low PE stats makes it difficult to characterize
  anything as a function of one side of electronics

N/F-1 vs. Near ADC
N/F-1 vs. Far ADC
10
Trigger Timing

• We left trigger a bit early to avoid any doubt
  about containing rising edge
• Alfons/Anatael plot
• Expect very little energy 6 buckets from rising
  edge O(0.25)
• Observe more, but its quite constant in energy

All channels
E (mips)
11
To Do

• Use new Muon calibration
• Old version had requirement of both ends reading
  out bias in case of threshold difference
• Add more variables/histograms to analysis DST
• Almost done
• Understand Near/Far issues in terms of basic
  channel response
• E.g., timing? Threshold biases?
• Understand ND response in terms of QIE
• Any effect vs. number of slices? QIE Range?
• Light Injection Data
• Liz Buckley making progress

12
Stability Studies Dave Reyna

• Pedestals stability throughout Caldet run

All channels, all pedestal measurements
Single channel history
Some small pedestal drift with time
(temperature?), but only on order of 1 of a PE
13
Stability Studies, cont.

• Calibration stability over run of 1 week
• Measure response with charge injection, relative
  to calibration

Single channel ratio of calibrated response, end
of run over beginning of run (1 week)
Fit point
All channels, all measurements
Calibration is extremely stable 0.05 mean, 1
rms
Response ratio