L2-Hitcleaning and other L2 tests. Matthias Danninger. - ed - RT -

Transcription

1 Old FE NFE L2-Hitcleaning and other L2 tests - ed - RT -

2 Overview NFE vs oldfe details about study different parameters (position & time & reconstruction) conclusion SeededRTCut x-check what was done and how choice of seed choice of cut choice of iterations results corsika polygonato results atm. neutrinos 2

3 NFE or oldfe? Old FE NFE * data sets are corsika [/data/ana/ic79/sim/level1/4418 (CORSIKA SPICE1 dataset 4418)] & IC79 data [/data/ana/ic79/exp/level1/0604/new (run )], which are retriggered and/or processed by Andreas G. to IC79 L1 (still several issues, but does not effect this study!) * triggered events are filtered (logical or) with muon-filter, lowup-filter, lowe-contained * all pulse-series are SLC+HLC, cleaned with seeded RTCut; 2 iter., R=150m, TW=1000ns (by looking into L1-scripts, this seems to be a different setting now! find best setting) * both pulse-series have NO TWCut as cleaning was causing a dicrepancy (also used different FADC-settings) * NFE and oldfe pulse-series are subjected to linefit and 32 iterations IterativeFitter Corsika muon background study: IC79 real data study: total filtered corsika events total filtered IC79-data events successful 32iter llh-fits NFE successful 32iter llh-fits NFE successful 32iter llh-fits oldfe successful 32iter llh-fits oldfe

4 NFE or oldfe? plotted: NString data IC79 simulation 4

5 NFE or oldfe? plotted: Nchan data IC79 simulation 5

6 NFE or oldfe? plotted: COG (x,y,z) data IC79 (X) (Y) (Z) simulation 6

7 NFE or oldfe? plotted: time-extension data IC79 simulation 7

8 NFE or oldfe? plotted: 32iter-llh zenith data IC79 simulation 8

9 NFE or oldfe? plotted: space angle (µmc-µreco) Positive values indicate improvement with NFE Only simulation 9

10 NFE or oldfe? plotted: total event charge divided by number of pulses IC79 data only oldfe & NFE IC79 data & MC oldfe only No big differences in results for oldfe & NFE (time & charge) Individual llh-reco results can differ average over many events unchanged Improvement for events with small [charge per pulse] save to switch? (Yes) 10

11 Hitcleaning x-check not all MCHits result in a DOMLaunch number of physics hits, compared to MCTruth, in the InIceRawData is not 100% more like 93% which is also taken as the possible 100% reference for the evaluation of the performance of the seededrtcut-cleaning Two main variables for this x-check: * physics ratio: number of physics-launches in selected seededrtcut-series total amount of physics hits * purity: number of physics-launches in selected seededrtcut-series total number of launches in selected seededrtcut-series 11

12 Configurations The current online L1 settings: R=150m, T=1000ns, 2 iterations (seed = COG of all HLC hits). Datasets: spice1 corsika dataset-4418 the spice1 atm. neutrino dataset, numu-4337 (E ¹) [too much high-e bias], and the quite outdated atm. neutrino dataset, numu-2488 (E ²) [better energy range]. Seeds: COG of all HLC hits [used in online filtering L1] every HLC hit COG of the RT-cleaned HLC hits Cuts: radius of distance-cut on the IceCube strings, R [fixed to 150m] length of time window for launches on IceCube strings, T [1000ns or 2000ns] radius of distance-cut on DeepCore strings, RDC [80m, 120m, 160m] length of time window for launches on DeepCore strings, TDC [1000ns or 2000ns] Iterations: how often this RT cut should be applied if a new hit is found within the limits [2, 3, 4, 5] 12

13 Results (1/9) Corsika polygonato Incl. coincident µ Number of selected HLC Number of selected DOMLaunches 13

14 Results (2/9) Corsika polygonato Incl. coincident µ 14

15 Results (2/9) Corsika polygonato Incl. coincident µ 15

16 Results (3/9) Corsika polygonato Incl. coincident µ 16

17 Results (3/9) Corsika polygonato Incl. coincident µ 17

18 Results (4/9) Corsika polygonato Incl. coincident µ 18

19 Results (5/9) atm. neutrino (E ¹) Number of selected DOMLaunches 19

20 Results (6/9) atm. neutrino (E ¹) 20

21 Results (6/9) atm. neutrino (E ¹) 21

22 Results (7/9) atm. neutrino (E ¹) 22

23 Results (8/9) old atm. neutrino (E ²) SMT8 String SMT3 23

24 Results (9/9) atm. neutrino (E ¹) 24

25 Hitcleaning x-check summary seededrtcut-cleaning selects about 20-25% more physics hits than the so far used HLC-only series the selected launch-series is of very high purity (~98-99%) the COG as a seed (used so far) seems to be the least best choice allhlc or HLCcore perform much better, but are also more time intensive for high-nchan events. For events of NChan<~40 should be no noticable difference BUT it doesn't select 100% of the physics launches. These missed physicslaunches could be(are) crucial for a veto like the DeepCore veto there is of course still room for improvement in the method, but this cleaning clearly improves the selection of physics hits of an event change for L2-processing some parameters (e.g. number of iterations), maybe(definately) the seed to COG of RT-cleaned HLC or allhlc? as the numu E-1 dataset shows (as well as coincident corsika events) this cleaning also improves the physics selection for very high-nchan events it is yet to be determined how this influences the llh-reconstruction (my guess is positive or not much at all) 25

26 We should decide together on L2-settings The current online L1 settings: R=150m, T=1000ns, 2 iterations (seed = COG of all HLC hits). Proposed L2 settings: R=150m, T=1000ns, 2 iter. (seed = HLCcore of HLC hits) Proposed L2 settings: DeepCore (same RT values) FIRST: standard TW-cut (150/1000) SECOND: R=150m, T=1000ns, 1 iter. (seed = allhlc hits) Thank you DeepCore (same RT values) 26

27 Extra Slides 27

28 Scatter numu old-dataset E ² 28