MINERvA Simulation-HCAL and ECAL Calorimetry

Jaewon ParkUniversity of Rochester

MINERvA Collaboration Meeting, Sep 29, 2006

2

Energy Loss Calculation

scintscintmin

scintscintminiron

ironminscint

losstotalloss )(

)()(L

LLEEdxdE

dxdE

dxdE

scintLironL

particleiron scint

3

Detector Logical Region

Scint onlyECALHCALNucl. target

0θ

40θ80θ

For HCAL study, lead can be ignored

For theta=0deg, particle will hit DS-HCAL.

For theta=40deg, it passes both DS-HCAL and OD

4

Theta dependence

2.2GeV proton beam is used Need to calibrate (or correct leakage) to make mean shift flat

measured11

true

11

mean

truemeasured

t

tm)(

EE

EE

EEE

EE

ΔE/E mean) (ΔE/E

5

Theta dependence

HCAL=OD+DSHCAL Like to know whether mean shift is effect of leakage or improper calibration Event selection for avoiding MIP-like event makes theta dependence more complicat

ed

scintscintminID )(55.1 LE dx

dE

6

Infinite OD

With infinite OD, there will be no leakage to OD

Original OD + 5cm x 19 layers

7

Guessing leakage from extended OD layers

Extended OD layers: 5.72cm x 3 + 11.43cm + 5cm x 19 layers With extended OD geometry, leakage is eliminated. Mean shift got flatter but not completely flat New OD calibration might make mean shift flat.

8

Relative calibration for OD layers

E id and E hcal from extended OD looks complementary shape Leakage energy is acquired from extended layers Relative calibration constant for OD can be estimated using the f

act total energy should be constant

ODDSIDTotal aEEEE a=1.3 seems best value

9

OD calibration: Applying to actual geometry

Mean shift got better. Resolution increased a little bit. It’s unavoidable. Same for leakage correction

Our model for leakage correction Simple leakage correction can be based on interaction length Want to parametise leakage as function of interaction length

10

Slot optimization

45.7411.4312.1559.777.3855v4

45.7511.4311.437.637.637.63v3

45.735.7211.4311.4311.435.72v2

45.7311.4311.4311.435.725.72v1

45.7417.1511.435.725.725.72orig OD v2 is not practical Too thin most outer layer

OD v4 would be best

11

ECAL -Overview Preliminary ECAH study

Electron beam is used. (Previous HCAL study uses proton beam) Looked at Energy dependence, Vertex Z dependence, theta de

pendence Try to find calibration constant for ECAL

Here, ID means pure plastic scintillator

b and c is calculated from dE/dx weighting. (b=1.75) After some tries, ECAL calibration factor b=2.5 gives better re

solution than 1.75 2.5/1.75=1.43

)EEE(E HCALECALID cba

12

DS-ECAL Energy and Vertex Z dependence Vz = 0cm Theta=0deg

b=2.53 makes mean shift flat

1GeV electron beam Resolution is better when ID/OD is high b=2.51 makes mean shift flat

E/E/E)( ba

13

Barrel ECAL Theta dependence

E=1GeV, Vz = 0cm Theta=0,10,…50deg b alone can’t make mean shift flat 2.5 times OD calibration factor seems to mean shift flat but made resoluti

on twice

14

Thicker ECAL

4mm lead gives ~20% decrease on resolution 3mm lead gives ~10% decrease on resolution