- bouchet's home page
- Posts
- 2016
- 2015
- December (1)
- November (3)
- October (2)
- September (2)
- August (2)
- June (2)
- April (5)
- March (2)
- February (3)
- January (2)
- 2014
- December (2)
- November (2)
- October (3)
- September (2)
- August (3)
- July (1)
- June (3)
- May (6)
- April (6)
- March (1)
- February (2)
- January (1)
- 2013
- December (2)
- November (3)
- October (3)
- September (4)
- August (1)
- July (1)
- May (4)
- April (6)
- March (4)
- February (3)
- 2012
- 2011
- December (2)
- November (2)
- October (4)
- September (1)
- August (2)
- July (6)
- June (2)
- May (3)
- April (3)
- March (2)
- 2010
- 2009
- December (2)
- November (1)
- October (3)
- September (1)
- August (1)
- July (1)
- June (2)
- April (1)
- March (2)
- February (2)
- January (1)
- 2008
- My blog
- Post new blog entry
- All blogs
TCFIT vs. KFPARTICLE
Simulation to compare the reconstructed decay length of D0 using TCFIT and KFParticle
note : the BFC chain has been run over 50k, not all the 100k.
1- TCFIT
The MC decay length is calculated with the .fz (or .geant.root) by :
Fig 1 : correlation between the GEANT decay and reco. decay
Fig 2 : cosine(angle) vs. reco. decay : cosine(angle) is the angle between the momentum vector of the pair and the vector joining the PV and decay vertex.
Negative values are likely background.
Fig 3 : DL (reco) - DL (MC) vs. DL (MC) for 3 cuts
Fig 4 and Fig 5 : mean and resolution of DL (reco) - DL (MC) vs. DL (MC) for 3 cuts
2- KFParticle
Fig 6 : DL (reco) - DL (MC) vs. DL (MC) for 3 cuts
Fig 7 and Fig 8 : mean and resolution of DL (reco) - DL (MC) vs. DL (MC) for 3 cuts
Fig 10 : requiring that both daughters have 2 or more PXL hits also improve the error of the reco. decay length (by taking advantage of the single track pointing resolution)
- 100k D0 with flat Pt in [0.1 ;5.0], |η|<1, 0<φ<2π
- 1D0 per event so that the correlation with the reconstructed pair is easy
note : the BFC chain has been run over 50k, not all the 100k.
1- TCFIT
The MC decay length is calculated with the .fz (or .geant.root) by :
- looping over the vertexTable
- take the entry for which the particle Id = 37 (D0)
- take its vertex position and calculate the decayGeant2D and decayGeant3D
- run the BFC chain (y2014, PIX in tracking only, not sure of the IST)
- no particle Id
- TCFIT gives the signed decay length and its error
- TCFIT uses StDcaTrackGeometry and fit the 2 daughters particle to find their common point
- negative decay length means that the product of the momentum vector and position vector (secondary vertex - primary vertex) is negative
- KFParticle : no mass constraint, primary vertex constraint
Fig 1 : correlation between the GEANT decay and reco. decay
Fig 2 : cosine(angle) vs. reco. decay : cosine(angle) is the angle between the momentum vector of the pair and the vector joining the PV and decay vertex.
Negative values are likely background.
Fig 3 : DL (reco) - DL (MC) vs. DL (MC) for 3 cuts
Fig 4 and Fig 5 : mean and resolution of DL (reco) - DL (MC) vs. DL (MC) for 3 cuts
- <DL(reco)- DL(MC)>~0 means no deviation in the reco.
- σ(DL(reco)- DL(MC)) ~ 40-50µm resolution for both daughters having PIX hits > 1
2- KFParticle
Fig 6 : DL (reco) - DL (MC) vs. DL (MC) for 3 cuts
Fig 7 and Fig 8 : mean and resolution of DL (reco) - DL (MC) vs. DL (MC) for 3 cuts
- <DL(reco)- DL(MC)>~0 means no deviation in the reco.
- σ(DL(reco)- DL(MC)) ~ 40-50µm resolution for both daughters having PIX hits > 1
Fig 10 : requiring that both daughters have 2 or more PXL hits also improve the error of the reco. decay length (by taking advantage of the single track pointing resolution)
Groups:
- bouchet's blog
- Login or register to post comments