- heppel's home page
- Posts
- 2021
- July (3)
- 2020
- February (1)
- 2019
- 2018
- 2017
- 2016
- December (2)
- November (2)
- October (3)
- September (2)
- August (1)
- July (3)
- June (5)
- May (8)
- April (4)
- March (1)
- February (2)
- January (2)
- 2015
- December (1)
- November (4)
- October (8)
- September (4)
- August (3)
- July (2)
- June (7)
- May (8)
- April (5)
- March (13)
- February (5)
- January (2)
- 2014
- December (1)
- November (2)
- September (1)
- June (3)
- May (2)
- April (1)
- March (3)
- February (2)
- January (1)
- 2013
- 2012
- 2011
- December (2)
- November (1)
- September (2)
- August (3)
- July (2)
- June (6)
- May (2)
- April (2)
- March (3)
- February (3)
- January (3)
- 2010
- December (1)
- November (2)
- September (2)
- August (1)
- July (4)
- June (3)
- May (2)
- April (1)
- March (1)
- February (2)
- January (1)
- 2009
- 2008
- My blog
- Post new blog entry
- All blogs
Trigger Rates
I looked at analyzed data from run 16066026 to understand the trigger rates and to attempt to predict what the rates would be for a change to "take all (prescale 1)" for FMS JP1 triggers. I have analyzed the current and predicted rates as a function of pseudo-rapidity and energy. In this plot, the black curve represents the total fms trigger rate from from 16066026. The green curve is the projected contribution from Trigger JP1 if the prescale of 20 is removed and replaced with "take all".
The results are summarized as follows.
Adding the contributions from the full FMS.
Unlike the previous analysis, this does not involve pi0 events but all triggered events in the run, analyzed with a very large cone radius, so there is exactly 1 cluster in each event. The energy is the cluster energy and the pseudorapidity is the cluster pseudorapidity.
As we expected, the biggest changes come in the small cells, where the current rate is lower.
- heppel's blog
- Login or register to post comments