W 2012 AL (begins here)

 

STAR Preliminary results relased on October 16, 2012.

The EPS version of the plots (also w/o data) is HERE, the table w/ numerical values is HERE.

 

 

 

2012 STAR preliminary values of W AL ,  October 16, 2012

 

 

 

 

Measured lepton with  25<ET<50 GeV and eta range as listed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

W plus

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

etaAvr

etaRms

etaLow

etaHigh

AL(W+) 

tot error

stat. corr.

 

-1.15

0.17

-1.32

-0.99

-0.109

0.273

a

 

-0.69

0.13

-1.00

-0.50

-0.244

0.070

c

 

-0.24

0.14

-0.50

0.00

-0.360

0.060

d

 

0.25

0.14

0.00

0.50

-0.433

0.062

d

 

0.71

0.13

0.50

1.00

-0.443

0.071

c

 

1.15

0.17

0.99

1.32

-1.017

0.243

a

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

W minus

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

etaAvr

etaRms

etaLow

etaHigh

AL(W-) 

tot error

stat. corr.

 

-1.212

0.137

-1.35

-1.08

0.545

0.254

b

 

-0.756

0.128

-1.00

-0.50

0.259

0.122

e

 

-0.266

0.150

-0.50

0.00

0.314

0.128

f

 

0.260

0.141

0.00

0.50

0.371

0.131

f

 

0.724

0.137

0.50

1.00

0.403

0.126

e

 

1.212

0.137

1.08

1.35

0.000

0.275

b

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total error accounts for uncorrelated statistical and background errors added in quadrature

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Correlated errors NOT included in the total error

 

Systematic AL scale error ( multiplicative) 

0.034

 

 

 

Systematic AL offset  error (additive)

0.007

 

 

 

Statistical correlation between eta-symmetric pairs  of AL as indicated

 

 

 

a,b

-0.10

 

 

 

 

 

 

c,d,e,f

-0.05

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

01 Projections

Projected accuracy of AL for Ws at 'mid rapidity' from combined data 2009,2011,2012

 

 

Bernd's projections for various LT & P : http://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/24247

02 Plan of action

 

W 2012 task force January 3 , 2012, updated March 12
 

Parallel directions of analysis:

* 2009 muDst : reply w/ new W algo
* 2011 muDst :  run QA,  EMC calib check (ped, stat, gains -> Alice O.), spinBits upload to DB, replay W algo, vertex QA (pileup), estimate not reducible QCD bckg,  vet stability of AL & false asymmetries
* 2012 : oversee data taking (+cdev, +L2 mon) , real time W reco at a remote site, stage daq-files for BFC production, help with TPC+vertex calib - if needed, follow all steps for 2011 muDst
* write W AL paper now : assume we will get results similar to the those on the cumulative AL projection plot. LHC can publish weeks after their run stops, we can do it months after run stop too. 
* simulation/embedding needs? 
    - Yes, for W->tau and Z->ee backgrounds (maybe use Run 9 samples?), need estimate of absolute lumi for norm. but not vernier scan.
    - No, for QCD unless study of veto by clusters in the 1st FGT disk. 
 
Technical challenges:
- reserve, customize, and maintain CPU power for real-time BFC production over pp200+pp500 2012 data taking. 
- stage simultaneously  W-muDst from 3 years at one computing facility, allow for 2 different copies for run 2012 
- assure sufficient CPU to replay all W-muDst within one week. 
- stage all W-daq files from 2012 to await BFC production with post-run STAR calibration
- run post-run BFC production as 1-2K  parallel jobs, assure muDst get registered at RCF

My guess is we will need  200 CPU x4 months for the real-time processing, later 2000 CPU for 1 month for BFC production of full 2012 W-data set. Disk space: 100-500 TB - if we manage to avoid partial HPSS storage.


Tasks below  require a dedicated person per task,  parallel effort. Not all tasks  will last the same amount of time nor require the same daily effort. Writing of the needed/missing  software not included.
- data transfer, job submission, monitoring of CPU load - 4 months of 4 hours/day job, could be more
- prepare, maintain STAR code at a remote farm: at start 1 month full time, later  1h/day for 4 months 
- QA of reco Ws - 4 months of 1h/day job, may be combined with QA of L2 plots
- QA of 2011+2012 STAR runs - many months of 'desk work'. 
- determination of spin bits loaded to DB for run 2011+2012 - 3 weeks of work after muDst are available.
- BEMC calibration for  2012 - a month of work with muDst (use Zs?, should find ~100), assuming HV not changed, plus watch L2ped during pp500 run
- EEMC calibration for 2012 - gain likely lower than Run 9 and HV was changed to correct , so new calibration needed (MIP, pi0, Z?)
- writing STAR analysis note of the progressing analysis (many people describe their work, one supervisor is needed)
- TPC calibration+beam line position - I hope STAR Calib team will do it all?
- TOF calibration to improve PPV vertex quality - status not known
 
Organization:
- create W2012 mailing list which is 'protected', web-visible,  and accepts 5MB attachments. DONE:  star-wana-l@lists.bnl.gov
- use only Drupal to document progresses. DONE: head-page w/ edit4all privilege  http://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/10125
- weekly dedicated phone meetings (which you should not miss)
- one 3-days face-to-face workshop before Summer vacations
- Jan will be custodian of master latex draft of the W2012  AL paper 
- Justin will be custodian for latex draft of W2012 analysis note
- Gene will oversee progress of calibrations
- Hal will oversee QA of runs, Justin will generate raw .cvs table, Jan will do first pass of automatic run rejection 
 
Boundary conditions
understood as follows: Everyone is free to do more than the minimum we agree is our goal, but should not delay delivering of his/her share of the work because of such additional studies.
* focus on releasing cumulative preliminary results for W AL  as part of the paper draft presented to GPC in early Fall of 2012. Avoid earlier partial releases to not burn our resources. 
* Endcap Ws only form data taken in 2011+2012
* only TPC tracking used to reco Ws - this limits the eta range to [-1.3,+1.3]
* no use of FGT unless significant benefit of veto of QCD is demonstrated w/ M-C for W eta>+1. Only 1st FGT disk, cluster based, no use of FGT tracking. FGT 1st disk must perform well in run 2012.
* no A_N for Ws from pp500 transPol run form 2011
* no x-section determination for W - not care about Vernier scan for 2011, 2012 data.
* no  study of W+/W- x-section 
 
Brake down of selected tasks
 
====== run QA for year 2011, 2012=====
Decisions/comments:
- are we doing work for the whole spin PWG or narrow it down to W AL paper?
- some of the steps may differ year-to-year, we should strive for unification of cases
- can we use 2009 run list as is, or some runs needs to be rejected based on Ross QA of vernier scan?
Steps:
- review list of relevant problems (key-words) of STAR detector elements
- review list of variables per run extracted automatically from DB (the online page)
- define (minimal) check sequence for every run, where are the plots?
- automatically generate full 'possible-good' run list, reject automatically as many questionable runs as possible.
- divide runs in to several segments and assign QA people
- name QA progress supervisor, who will track  progress (also for ongoing 2012 run) and summon those who stale
- merge  inputs from QA-people in to the master spread sheet.
 

 

03 W-mailing list

 Dedicated W-analyssis miling list was created at BNL: star-wana-l@lists.bnl.gov

This mailing list is:

  • archived on the web  https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/private/star-wana-l/ , use your own password to get thrugh
  • protected, only members who subscribe to it can see the archive
  • accepts  attachments  below 5MB by default, larger require approval from moderator
  • administered by Jan Balewski (and Jerome )

To subscribe go to this URL : https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-wana-l  and fill the form, wait for my approval.

General info about this mailing list can be found here https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-wana-l

Note, the quality of web-archiving is not that great, it is not HN-quality, but we can sent attachements. Archive is agregated by month, not searchable

 

04 Meetings (empty)

 No fixed date, schedule yet, TBD 

05 Documents

 Suggested sub-categories

  • existing publications
  • W2012 AL publiction (in progress)
  • W2012 STAR Analysis Note (in progress)
  • instructions

 


Varia:

*How to handle error propagation for low stats: http://prd.aps.org/pdf/PRD/v57/i7/p3873_1. Table II gives 1-sigma confidence level bounds for a given number of observed events (n_0) with an expected number of background events (b) .

06 Calibrations

 Notes on callibrations of various relevant STAR  detectors for 3 years will be discussed below.

 

year 2009  fill: 10407 -10536
year 2011  fill: 15426-15472
year 2012  fill: 16582-16735

 

 

01 RHIC polarization

 The master DB web interface is:

 http://www.phy.bnl.gov/cnipol/fills/

The CVS tables can be obtained by selecting “user (cvs)” format from the Table format  or directly from 
https://wiki.bnl.gov/rhicspin/Run_12_polarization
https://wiki.bnl.gov/rhicspin/Run_11_polarization
https://wiki.bnl.gov/rhicspin/Run_09_polarization


Summary of beam polarization for ppLong for last 3 years. 

For W AL measurement the relative FOM= (P1+P2)^2*L  are as follows

2012: FOM=92

2011: FOM=12

2009 : FOM=7

Fig 1.


Fig 2. yield of reco Ws (top) and diagram of polarization decay for both rings, vs. GMT time.

Several approximations were made while displaying offline RHIC pol values taken from the official web page, using: t0, avrP, P0, tau for each beam and each fill.

  1. shown are only fills in which STAR Ws were found
  2. each fill is set to last for 7 hours unless the next fill starts
  3. black trapezoids use P0+Tau*(t-t0)
  4. magenta lines show avrP
  5. the red line fit is made to bins with trapezoid, so it is equivalent to NOT weighted average - I do it just for x-check.

07 Data analysis

 run lists, key intermedaite results, mostly for real data analysis

01 run QA

Run QA of pp500 2012 data will be W-analysis oriented. We will focus only on detectors/problems relevant for W analysis. 

The simplifed list of 2-letter key-words is below. In general keys have only 4 values: good, acceptable,fatal, don't-know (not all present). Multiple keys should be separated by white space (do NOT use , ) 

 ?? - no one checked this run 
???? - * and runs macred as questionable or bad by the shift leader 

Ok - all seems to be reasonable for this run

Xx - *never use this run for any analysis. If runs are marked   "junk","bad" or questionable by shiftleader, use your judgement as to whether these are analyzable at least for some detector and you wish to over rule them.  

Tm - TPX minor problems
Tx -* TPX  unusable
T?  - TPX  problem I do not understand
Em - ETOW some tower  bad but most were working
Ex -* ETOW towers unusable, e.g. all corrupted or off
Mm - EEMC some MAPMT box was bad but mostly usable
Mx -* EEMC MAPMTs not usuble this run
M?  - EEMC MAPMT  problem I do not understand
Bx -* BEMC towers unusable, e.g. all corrupted or off
Bm - BEMC some towers  have problem but mostly usable
B?  - BTOW MAPMT  problem I do not understand
Pc - data taken during polarization measurement
Qx - bunch crossing or spin pattern problems
Tr - trigger rate anomalies for small part of run as seen in the rate plots 
Tb  -* L2WB low yield
Te  -* L2WE low yield
Oe - TOF problem at the end of run
Om - TOF errors on JPLOT figure
Ox -* TOF not usable
O? - TOF problem you do not understand
Sm - BSMD minor problem
Sx - * BSMD not usable
S? - BSMD problem you do not understand

Gx - * FGT not usable
Ux - * missing muDst or run not produced , typically for 2011 data
Zm - ZDC scaler attenuator was inserted, different reference rate, corrected in the table using Gene's formula: (0.09/0.005) *ZDCX_days85,86 = ZDCX_other_days 

Jx - discared based on muDst content (track, vertex,etc QA) by Justin, details are here http://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/25066/

Obsolete: u1 - *  muDst were produced by Jan+Justin during data taking and reside at MIT or IUCF disc
 
 
 
Comments:
  • FGT QA: it will not be QA'ed by humans. If at a later stage FGT will be found usefull then an automat will crawl over root files form JPlot and extract relevant info.
  • The main emphasis of human run QA should be on reading the shift log or inspecting the trigger rate plots. This is hard to automatize
  • results available 2-3 weeks after the end of the assigned week.
  • each person should use the ";" table prepared by Justin - it is avaliable as 'link' in the table below.
  • keys tagged with *  can be filled by automatic run QA 

 The output of your QA should be 3 columns:

runNumber,  keys separated by spaces, additional remarks you may have

 Table 1
Run QA assignment of 2012 pp data
Dates Lt (from Jamie) Run ranges Person Name # QA runs QA file Completion date
Mar 17 - 23 ~ 13/pb R13077059-R13083084   Jan     144   -          May 25
Mar 24 - 30 ~ 13/pb  R13084001-R13090050   Hal      130   -           May 7
Mar 31 - Apr 6 ~ 20/pb R13091001-R13097052   Hal      152   -           July 19
Apr 7 - 13 ~ 22/pb R13098026-R13104063   Hal      150   -           Aug. 9
Apr 14 - 2? ~ 18/pb R13105003-R13109042   Justin      149   -           June 5
OLD raw tables from Justin: link1, link2, link3, link4, link5

 


Attachment A)  ver 1  run list for whole pp510 2012 running time ,  CSV table (gzipped) , automatically QAed ,

  • rejected (Xx) production runs: 139
  • non-rejected production runs : 755, contain 8.1M L2WB events and 2.7M L2WE events

Attachement C)  ver 1 run list for whole pp500 2011 running time ,  CSV table (gzipped) , automatically QAed 

  • ppTrans data cover days 38-98, Ok'ed only automatically (no human inspection)
    • Ok'runs: 924, contain events: L2WB=3.6M, L2WE=1.3M
  • ppLong data cover days 99-108,  automatically QA'ed, still needs human inspection
    • non-rejected runs: 196, contain events: L2WB=1.5M,  L2WE=0.4M
TABLE 2
runQC_2012_day77_109

JAN:
+F: 16582 R13077059 ,  nRunOk= 22 , eve sum= 165488 , nFill= 0 delEve= 165488
+F: 16586 R13078024 ,  nRunOk= 42 , eve sum= 355145 , nFill= 1 delEve= 189657
+F: 16587 R13079013 ,  nRunOk= 58 , eve sum= 516386 , nFill= 2 delEve= 161241
+F: 16592 R13079069 ,  nRunOk= 69 , eve sum= 729752 , nFill= 3 delEve= 213366
+F: 16593 R13080008 ,  nRunOk= 74 , eve sum= 826984 , nFill= 4 delEve= 97232
+F: 16594 R13080078 ,  nRunOk= 92 , eve sum= 1018269 , nFill= 5 delEve= 191285
+F: 16597 R13081003 ,  nRunOk= 95 , eve sum= 1096636 , nFill= 6 delEve= 78367
+F: 16602 R13081018 ,  nRunOk= 109 , eve sum= 1320925 , nFill= 7 delEve= 224289
+F: 16618 R13083008 ,  nRunOk= 125 , eve sum= 1425379 , nFill= 8 delEve= 104454
+F: 16619
+F: 16620 R13084021 ,  nRunOk= 158 , eve sum= 1905415 , nFill= 10 delEve= 259299

HAL:
+F: 16622 R13084045 ,  nRunOk= 169 , eve sum= 2115063 , nFill= 11 delEve= 209648
+F: 16625 R13085023 ,  nRunOk= 183 , eve sum= 2327822 , nFill= 12 delEve= 212759
+F: 16626 R13085058 ,  nRunOk= 188 , eve sum= 2366182 , nFill= 13 delEve= 38360
+F: 16627 R13086064 ,  nRunOk= 206 , eve sum= 2605485 , nFill= 14 delEve= 239303
+F: 16632 R13087008 ,  nRunOk= 220 , eve sum= 2799645 , nFill= 15 delEve= 194160
+F: 16633 R13087046 ,  nRunOk= 232 , eve sum= 2939987 , nFill= 16 delEve= 140342
+F: 16643 R13089015 ,  nRunOk= 241 , eve sum= 3043785 , nFill= 17 delEve= 103798
+F: 16650 R13090003 ,  nRunOk= 259 , eve sum= 3276440 , nFill= 18 delEve= 232655
F: 16655 R13090034 ,  nRunOk= 274 , eve sum= 3441661 , nFill= 19 delEve= 165221

Hal for WILL:
+F: 16656 R13091018 ,  nRunOk= 292 , eve sum= 3727202 , nFill= 20 delEve= 285541
+F: 16657 R13091048 ,  nRunOk= 296 , eve sum= 3782790 , nFill= 21 delEve= 55588
+F: 16659 R13092004 ,  nRunOk= 300 , eve sum= 3872553 , nFill= 22 delEve= 89763
+F: 16662 R13092014 ,  nRunOk= 317 , eve sum= 4065611 , nFill= 23 delEve= 193058
+F: 16667 R13093006 ,  nRunOk= 336 , eve sum= 4304284 , nFill= 24 delEve= 238673
+F: 16668 R13093043 ,  nRunOk= 358 , eve sum= 4622506 , nFill= 25 delEve= 318222
+F: 16669 R13094033 ,  nRunOk= 367 , eve sum= 4737795 , nFill= 26 delEve= 115289
+F: 16671 R13094078 ,  nRunOk= 388 , eve sum= 5078514 , nFill= 27 delEve= 340719
+F: 16678 R13095041 ,  nRunOk= 403 , eve sum= 5265207 , nFill= 28 delEve= 186693
+F: 16685 R13096055 ,  nRunOk= 421 , eve sum= 5569174 , nFill= 29 delEve= 303967
+F: 16686 R13097011 ,  nRunOk= 440 , eve sum= 5891274 , nFill= 30 delEve= 322100

Hal for BERND:
+F: 16690 R13098026 ,  nRunOk= 456 , eve sum= 6112638 , nFill= 31 delEve= 221364
+F: 16691 R13098060 ,  nRunOk= 471 , eve sum= 6384325 , nFill= 32 delEve= 271687
+F: 16693 R13099025 ,  nRunOk= 488 , eve sum= 6706365 , nFill= 33 delEve= 322040
+F: 16697 R13099055 ,  nRunOk= 505 , eve sum= 7029246 , nFill= 34 delEve= 322881
+F: 16698 R13100022 ,  nRunOk= 522 , eve sum= 7309288 , nFill= 35 delEve= 280042
+F: 16699 R13100048 ,  nRunOk= 538 , eve sum= 7614720 , nFill= 36 delEve= 305432
+F: 16701 R13101011 ,  nRunOk= 548 , eve sum= 7747627 , nFill= 37 delEve= 132907
+F: 16704 R13101037 ,  nRunOk= 561 , eve sum= 8003709 , nFill= 38 delEve= 256082
+F: 16705 R13101055 ,  nRunOk= 564 , eve sum= 8053633 , nFill= 39 delEve= 49924
+F: 16710 R13103002 ,  nRunOk= 576 , eve sum= 8275155 , nFill= 40 delEve= 221522
+F: 16716 R13104001 ,  nRunOk= 585 , eve sum= 8400716 , nFill= 41 delEve= 125561
+F: 16717 R13104017 ,  nRunOk= 588 , eve sum= 8458036 , nFill= 42 delEve= 57320
+F: 16720 R13104043 ,  nRunOk= 606 , eve sum= 8780320 , nFill= 43 delEve= 322284

JUSTIN:
+F: 16722 R13105003 ,  nRunOk= 623 , eve sum= 9046831 , nFill= 44 delEve= 266511
+F: 16723 R13105037 ,  nRunOk= 642 , eve sum= 9337249 , nFill= 45 delEve= 290418
+F: 16724 R13105060 ,  nRunOk= 658 , eve sum= 9636012 , nFill= 46 delEve= 298763
+F: 16725 R13106023 ,  nRunOk= 677 , eve sum= 9877899 , nFill= 47 delEve= 241887
+F: 16726 R13106056 ,  nRunOk= 693 , eve sum= 10086950 , nFill= 48 delEve= 209051
+F: 16727 R13107012 ,  nRunOk= 712 , eve sum= 10357967 , nFill= 49 delEve= 271017
+F: 16730 R13107051 ,  nRunOk= 726 , eve sum= 10522171 , nFill= 50 delEve= 164204
+F: 16731 R13108022 ,  nRunOk= 739 , eve sum= 10697106 , nFill= 51 delEve= 174935
+F: 16732 R13108069 ,  nRunOk= 746 , eve sum= 10768736 , nFill= 52 delEve= 71630
+F16735 R13109042 ,  nRunOk= 755 , eve sum= 10886591 , nFill= 53 delEve= 117855

#runs seen = 1069 ,  nRunOk= 755 , prod_Xx= 139 , eve in OK runs L2WB= 8141240  L2WE= 2745351  sum= 10886591

 

TABLE 3
runQC_2011_day99-108 (only ppLong pol data)

HAL:
+F15426
+F15427
+F15431
+F15435
+F15436
+F15438
+F15443
+F15444
+F15452
+F15457
+F15464
+F15466
+F15467
+F15470
+F15472

 


 

June 12, 2012

attachement D) contains   4 CVS tables  with compact, only-good run lists, for 3 years we care. Below is the content. trigIDs should allow you for controlling W algos.

Sometimes some non-essential values are missing, e.g. JamieLumi - I'll try to compute equivalent values if needed using other yields

Note, 2/5 of 2012 runs is only machine QA'ed - the next deadline for Will and Bernd  is this Friday. - VOID


02 Run 12 L2W Stream QA Summary

 

This page summarizes the Run 12 pp510 QA for the preliminary W analysis.  The presentation below describes how runs were selected and some outlier runs that were removed from the final analysis list.

 

More information can be found at the following links:

Manual QA (lots of spreadsheets)

Automated QA (lots more plots)

Final list of 640 runs for analysis

03 Evaluation of Run 12 L2W preview production (P12ic) TPC calibrations

Here we present some plots from the recently produced L2W stream preview production announced here.  Some details of Run QA and selection can be found here.  

Note: Run 12 day 85-86, have a different SC&GL calibration than the rest of the run due to changes to the ZDC which required using a different scaler for the luminosity dependence during these days.  This is evaluated some below.

 

Fig 1 Signed DCA:  In the run QA linked above you will find the slide shown below, which shows the signed DCA for primary tracks from highest positively rank vertices (average vs. runindex) for the L2 barrel and endcap W trigger separately and Q+ and Q- separately.  Days 85-85 are circled in red.

 

 

Fig 2 Charge ratio: In the plots below you see distributions of tracks which satisfy our track QA cuts of nHits, etc. and tracks with pt>10 GeV are candidates for Ws.  In the left panel you see the distributions for days 85-86 which show lower yield of Q- global tracks around pT~15 GeV, and then an excess of Q- tracks at high pT (Note: this is not reflected in the charge separation of the final selected W candidates in Fig 3).  The right panel shows the results for the remainder of the runs, and these distributions match our expectation from previous productions (ie. Run 9 pp500).

 

 

Fig 3 Charge Separation:  The Q/pT is shown for global and primary tracks for events witch satisfy our W requirements.  For the left panel the charge sign separation looks very good, and sufficient for the W analysis.  For days 85-86 the global track distribution looks strange, and the primary track distribution seems to be shifted towards higher Q/pT, with respect to our expectation from the other days.  Additionally, I've made this plot of the charge separation for each TPC sector independently in the attachment below and plots of the sDCA for each sector attachment below.

 

 

Fig 4 Reconstructed Zs: As a cross check of the charge sign separation it is useful to look at the number of Z candidate events which have the same charge sign, as this would mean either one of the charge signs from a real Z was misreconstructed or it was a background QCD event.  In both the panels below we see no Z candidates with the the same charge sign pairs.


 


From Jan:

This summary based on Justin's sDCA plots per sector.  For the West TPC we do have sin-wave pattern of sDCA vs. sector phi - this may well be due to beam line x0,y0 being off the correct value . For the East sector 21 is clear outlier. If this gets corrected there is almost no sin-wave residua. Rather all East sectors have one common offset of sDCA. 
Fig 4. 

04 testing eta-dependent spin sorting (A)

I'll test here macro computing asymmetry .

  1.  Generate high statistic M-C sample to verify the simultaneously reco AL and ALL do not interefere. Below you see reco SSA, DSA for 100k events per STAR eta bin, pol=0.6 for both beams. The red and green lines overlayed on data points show AL and ALL used by event generator. It agrees good enough. 
    Fig 1.

    ******* W(eta) summary for charge=P  INPUT=run12toySetB *********
    lumi-corrections:  0.968, 0.997, 1.009, 1.027,  applied
    star-bin, sum , yield ++ +- -+ --  ,  1/sqrt(sum)
    1  100000, 34711  18631  33511  13674  ,  0.003
    2  100000, 40620  19145  21934  18976  ,  0.003
    3  100000, 40366  22088  19301  18945  ,  0.003
    4  100000, 34876  33862  18369  13606  ,  0.003
    5   20000,  5776   7370   3747   3199  ,  0.007
    6   20000,  3970   7333   4181   4510  ,  0.007
    7   40000,  9746  14703   7928   7709  ,  0.005
    8  400000, 150574  93726  93116  65202  ,  0.002
    Spin results: pol1=0.60  pol2=0.60
    polBeam-bin, events, *** AL ***,sig*sqrt(M)
    10   40000   -0.197 +/- 0.009  nSig=22.0 ,  1.79
    11   20000   -0.308 +/- 0.013  nSig=24.2 ,  1.80
    12   20000   -0.087 +/- 0.012  nSig=7.3 ,  1.68
    13  200000   0.099 +/- 0.004  nSig=25.3 ,  1.75
    14  200000   0.310 +/- 0.005  nSig=59.4 ,  2.33
    15  200000   0.403 +/- 0.006  nSig=66.7 ,  2.70
    16  200000   0.602 +/- 0.008  nSig=75.0 ,  3.59
    17   20000   0.514 +/- 0.014  nSig=36.3 ,  2.00
    18   20000   0.218 +/- 0.012  nSig=17.8 ,  1.73
    19   40000   0.366 +/- 0.010  nSig=35.9 ,  2.04
    20  400000   0.353 +/- 0.006  nSig=56.2 ,  3.97
    polBeam-bin, events,*** ALL *** ,sig*sqrt(M)
    15  200000   0.503 +/- 0.009  nSig=58.5 ,  3.84
    16  200000   -0.104 +/- 0.006  nSig=16.4 ,  2.83
    17   20000   -0.296 +/- 0.020  nSig=14.7 ,  2.85
    18   20000   -0.422 +/- 0.021  nSig=20.4 ,  2.93
    19   40000   -0.359 +/- 0.015  nSig=23.8 ,  3.01
    20  400000   0.200 +/- 0.006  nSig=36.0 ,  3.50
    polBeam-bin, events, *** NULL ***  
    15  200000   0.000 +/- 0.009  nSig=0.0 
    16  200000   0.002 +/- 0.006  nSig=0.4 
    17   20000   0.180 +/- 0.020  nSig=8.9 
    18   20000   0.158 +/- 0.021  nSig=7.6 
    19   40000   0.169 +/- 0.015  nSig=11.2 
    20  400000   0.002 +/- 0.006  nSig=0.3 
    ******* end ************** charge=P  ********
    

05 W-algo pass-A through full 2012 data and MC

 Here are the EtaBin sorted histograms for the data and MC /star/u/stevens4/forJan/8.28.12/

For data day 84-86 are rejected.

jba310 = W+
jba311 = W-
jba322 = Z/gamma*
jbb330 = filtered QCD

Also, standard movies for each sample and eta slice are linked from
http://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/pwg/analysisstatushtml/w2012/preliminary-result-documentation

 


Attachements A-G,I-K show examples of critical plots for W-Algo, sorted by 6 eta bins and for 4 types of events: 2012 real data + MC: W+, W-, fileterd QCD

The plotting macro is in attachement H. The following relative normalization was used:

 

dataNameA[mxF]={"STAR data 2012", "Pythia W+", "filter Pythia QCD" , "Pythia W-"};

 lumScale[mxF]={80.,  192/0.65,   27*2.2,   198/0.84}; 

It was choosen to reproduce W+,W- eta-integrated yield. 

 


 

06 2nd Endcap Bckg vs. EtaBin

To estimate QCD events passing W-algo with lepton limited to a narrow eta-range due to missing East Endcap we will use amount of events passing W-algo for the mirror eta-bin while West Endcap was disabled on purpose in the data pass.

 

07 Preview of W AL(eta) from 2012 data for spin PWG

 Slides and writeups consistent with final eta-bin selection for 2012 W-data

08 Q/PT charge separation

Transformation Q/PT --> Q * ET/PT is applied to remove hyperbolic correlation between reco electron charge reco in TPC vs. reco ET from EMC.

The 5 eta bins cover electron rapidity ranges:

  1. [-1,-0.5]
  2. [-0.5,0]
  3. [0,0.5]
  4. [0.5,1]
  5. [1,1.5] (all endcap)

Fig 1.  The 2D distributions for pp500 2012 data are shown in the top row.

Bottom row shows  projection of 'gold Ws' with ET [25,50] GeV  fitted with gaussian, the mean and sigma of gauss are given on each plot.


Fig 2. Similar plots for Pythia W+ run thrugh BFC and best avaliable TpcRS simulation params. Clear difference in TPC reco accuracy is visible.

09 Alternative rel lumi monitors

 Alternative methods of monitoring relative spin dependent luminosities for W AL analysis.

Alternative low Pt QCD events recorded in the W-stream were spin sorted. The rato of the yields for those alternatives differ by less than 0.5% from the one obtained using the default rel lumi monitor events used in W AL.

Since the magnitude of W AL is of 0.1, the stability of lumi monitor of 0.005 is sufficient to be neglacted in the error propagation.

/* mapping of spin4-index to helicity at STAR  */   

       ka=10,  /* STAR pol B+ Y +  */

       kb=9,   /* STAR pol B+ Y -  */

       kc=6,   /* STAR pol B- Y +  */

       kd=5,   /* STAR pol B- Y -  */

 

Fig.1 Top row: left - defaul rel lumi monitor: events with flipped isolation cut and ET<20 GeV.

Middle - event count stored in the ttree. Right  - for events with reco prim vertex and at least 1 TPC track w/ pT >10 GeV/c I pick the highest  2x2 ET matched to such 10+ GeV/c track.

Bottom row - 3 subset of events: Left - all with a 10+ GeVc track, middle - additionally 2x2ET=[5,10] GeV, right - as before but 2x2 ET=[10,14] GeV.

Plots show ratio of yileds to the top left plot (the default) - deviatins from a constant are on the level of 0.5%. 

10 AL for Z->ee

See attached slides.

11 Endcap W AL from 2012 Data Spin PWG

 See attached slides

12 Systematic Error Update and Request for Preliminary Spin PWG

 See attached slides

Preparation for final Run 12 st_W stream production

 

07a monitor 2012 data taking


Below are selected plots for BHT3*L2BW ( the endcap component has the same values) 

Barrel Ws
 Fig 1. Luminosity  Fig 2. FOM=L*P^2

 

 

RHIC BEAMS
 Fig 9. RHIC intensity vs. days  Fig 10. RHIC intensity vs. time bucket

 

 

ASCII table with running integral of LT (time - what units?):  BHT3*L2BW

ASCII table with lumi per STAR run :  BHT3*L2BW, the columns are: Run,  Seconds since Dec 31, 2011 00:00 for run start, Seconds since Dec. 31, 2011 00:00 for run end, Integrated luminosity, prescale, livetime from TCU, base trigger

for luminosity monitoring, livetime of the base trigger, P^2 L, P^4 L


For the reference:

  • in 2009 we accumulated L=10/pb, P=0.4, FOM=1.6/pb
  • in 2011 we accumulated L=13/pb, P=0.4?, FOM=2 /pb

 

 

Barrel Ws
 Fig 5. BHT3 Luminosity w/ projections  Fig 6. BHT3 FOM=L*P^2 w/ projections

 

 

Fig X. H-jet polarisation for pp500 fills.

08 M-C simulations

Correlation between reco AL(+eta) vs. AL(-eta)

Study of correlation between AL(+eta) and AL(-eta), both determined from the same 8 statisticaly independent spin sorted yields.

Method: generate & reco AL 5000 times, produce correlation plot, compute correlation.

Code snipets below show  key parts of both steps.

Simplifications: lumi[spin]=const, ALL=0, P=1

Attached code  allows to run full simu in ~10 seconds.

Table 1 shows how correlation changes depending on assumed asymmetries.

Conclusion:

  • in general, correlation is given by formula COR=-1.3*AL(-eta)*AL(+eta)*P1*P2
  • for the case of double-sided computation of AL~0.2 (and P=1) the correlation between reco ALs is of -5%. It is negative - meaning both reco ALs tend to move toward or against each other.
  • for the case of single-sided computation of AL~0.3 (and P=1) the correlation between reco ALs is of -11%. 

Double-sided reco of AL


Single-sided reco of AL determined from the same 8 statisticaly independent spin sorted yields.


Reminder of the meaning of correlation coefficient (from Wikipedia)

Examples of M-C event display for W & QCD events

 Example of W events, more like this and also QCD events are in attachments

 

 

Polarized Tau Decay

In the background estimation for the W yields we account for W -> tau decays where the tau decays semi-leptonically to and electron and two neutrinos.  In PYTHIA the tau polarization is not considered in the decay, which results in an underestimation of the W -> tau yield which satisfies our requirements.  The suggestion in the PYTHIA manual is to use a program called Tauola, as an afterburner to correctly treat the polarized tau decay.  I inserted Tauola in starsim to process the tau decay before the full GEANT simulation of the detector response.  Attached is a summary of the study of polarized tau decays with the Tauola program.  

 

The conclusion is that the results of the Tauola afterburner in the PYTHIA simulation is consistent with the expectation of a simple model of the Michel decay spectrum (provided previously by Carl).  The Tauola afterburner is intended to be used in our background estimation to replace the ad-hoc correction for polarized decays used for the Run 9 publications.

 

Tauola is referenced in the Pythia manual, and a reference for it can be found at:

http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/0312240v1.pdf

 

09 varia

 Other miscellaneous  information

10 Theory

 

Bernd put together a Virtual Machine with both the CHE (NLO) and RHICBOS (Resummation) code, and directions for running these are posted.

RHICBOS directions

CHE directions

Comparison of AL for pp500 and pp510

 Using the CHE code (with DSSV and MRST2002) I compared W+ and W- AL for center of mass energy of 500 GeV (blue) and 510 GeV (red).  The change is small as expected, with a difference at mid-rapidity of less than 2%.

 

For completeness here are the numbers.

 


W+ pp500
eta=-2.25 AL=-0.133037
eta=-1.75 AL=-0.182091
eta=-1.25 AL=-0.232155
eta=-0.75 AL=-0.279067
eta=-0.25 AL=-0.319352
eta=0.25 AL=-0.372557
eta=0.75 AL=-0.414688
eta=1.25 AL=-0.451781
eta=1.75 AL=-0.514307
eta=2.25 AL=-0.673576
W+ pp510
eta=-2.25 AL=-0.120075
eta=-1.75 AL=-0.174056
eta=-1.25 AL=-0.228382
eta=-0.75 AL=-0.274046
eta=-0.25 AL=-0.319099
eta=0.25 AL=-0.372434
eta=0.75 AL=-0.415329
eta=1.25 AL=-0.456592
eta=1.75 AL=-0.512755
eta=2.25 AL=-0.669555

W- pp500
eta=-2.25 AL=0.018842
eta=-1.75 AL=0.0109192
eta=-1.25 AL=-0.00172645
eta=-0.75 AL=-0.00303291
eta=-0.25 AL=0.0446768
eta=0.25 AL=0.162059
eta=0.75 AL=0.287828
eta=1.25 AL=0.388246
eta=1.75 AL=0.448878
eta=2.25 AL=0.503238
W- pp510
eta=-2.25 AL=0.0195878
eta=-1.75 AL=0.0122011
eta=-1.25 AL=-0.000138017
eta=-0.75 AL=-0.00157857
eta=-0.25 AL=0.0450428
eta=0.25 AL=0.161664
eta=0.75 AL=0.282632
eta=1.25 AL=0.381473
eta=1.75 AL=0.448442
eta=2.25 AL=0.504252

 

 

  

11 Preliminary Result Documentation

Last Update 8.29.12

 

On this page we will collect documentation for the preliminary result planned to be released for DNP/QCD N'.  It will evolve as we results become available.

 

Task list (with links for completed):

  1.  Run QA
  2.  Define spin sorting computation for eta dependent AL
  3.  Evaluation of TPC calibration from P12ic production
  4.  Eta-sliced movies for barrel W, endcap W, and Z algos ( labeled dataB, dataE, and dataZ, respectively): Data { 2012, 2011, 2009 } and for MC { W+, W-, Zee, filtered QCD }
  5.  Comparison plots data/MC  for selected observables 
  6. Compute background fractions : 2nd Endcap QCD,  Z->ee,    W->tau->e
  7. Compute mean eta for each AL point
  8. Compute polarized background asymmetries from theory
  9. RHIC polarization:
    1. get tables for our fills
    2. DROP IT: etimate potential FOM improvement using # of reco events per fills
  10.  Produce AL(eta) from Run 12 data
  11. Vary algo cuts to maximize AL-signal/background:
    1. disable events with electron recorded in the last barrel eta bin and first endcap eta bin
    2.  endcap Ws 
      1. move ET cut  between 20-25 GeV
      2. change 2x2/4x4 isolation cut to  2x1/3x4  
      3. do sector dependent offset in Q/PT charge discrimination using WB data to find how much to move - should increase WE yield for spin sorting.
      4. suppress QCD background by
        1. narrowing Q/Pt date to form a banna-shape
        2. select TPC de/dx to be 1 MIP  , for simu QCD there is 50/50 for double MIP response 
  12.  Investigate systematics 
  13. Stability of AL vs data selection:
    1. divide data vs. ZDC rate
    2. divide data vs. fill pol pattern
    3. QCD sample w/ isolated electron or photon: ET>25, flip away side veto

 

Presentations:

 

12 Embedding Simulations

 

Run 11+12 W AL Paper Proposal Webpage


Title:

formula

formula

 

PAs: Jan Balewski, Justin Stevens, and Jinlong Zhang

Proposed Target Journal: Physical Review Letters (published)

Table with results (CSV format,html format

Paper Drafts:
     Version 0.0
     Version 0.1 
     Version 1.0
     Version 1.2
     Version 2.0
     Version 2.1
     Version 2.2
     Version 2.2.1 (same as Version 2.2 + STAR author list)
     Version 2.4 
     Version 2.5
     Version 2.6 (submitted to PRL)
     Version 3.0 (Referee response for GPC review)
     Version 3.1 (Referee response for Collaboration review) and Difference beteween Version 2.6 and 3.1
     Version 3.2 (Second PRL referee response) and Difference between Version 3.1 and 3.2


STAR Notes
     #590 : Profile Likelihood Method
     #597 : Asymmetry Analysis Note

Analysis code: CVS repository

Presentations:


Spin PWG Review:

GPC Review:

  • Hal Response 1 and 2
  • Anselm Response 1 and 2
  • Zhenyu Response 1 and 2

Collaboration Review:

PRL Referee Review:


Previous STAR W papers: 2009 Asymmetry PRL and Cross section PRD

Abstract: 

We report measurements of single and double spin asymmetries for $W^{\pm}$ and $Z/\gamma^*$ boson production in longitudinally polarized $p+p$ collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 510$ GeV by the STAR experiment at RHIC. The asymmetries for $W^{\pm}$ were measured as a function of the decay lepton pseudorapidity, which provides a theoretically clean probe of the proton's polarized quark distributions at the scale of the $W$ mass. The results are compared to theoretical predictions, constrained by recent polarized DIS measurements, and show a preference for a sizable, positive up antiquark polarization in the range $0.05<x<0.2$.



Figure 1:


Caption: (color online) $E_T^e$ distribution of  $W^-$ (top) and $W^+$ (bottom) candidate events (black), background contributions, and sum of backgrounds and $W \rightarrow e\nu$ MC signal (red-dashed).

Figure 2:



Caption: (color online) (a) Signed $P_{T}$-balance distribution for $e^\pm$ candidates reconstructed in the EEMC and (b) distribution of the product of the TPC reconstructed charge sign and $E_T/p_T$.


Figure 3:


Caption: (color online) Distribution of the invariant mass of $Z/\gamma^* \rightarrow e^+ e^-$ candidate events.  The $Z/\gamma^* \rightarrow e^+ e^-$ MC distribution (filled histogram) is shown for comparison.


Figure 4:



Caption: (color online) Longitudinal single-spin asymmetry $A_L$ for $W^\pm$ production as a function of lepton pseudorapidity, $\eta_e$, in comparison to theory predictions (see text for details).

Figure 5:



Caption: (color online) Longitudinal double-spin asymmetry $A_{LL}$ for $W^\pm$ production as a function of lepton pseudorapidity, $|\eta_e|$, in comparison to theory predictions (see text for details).


Summary:

In summary, we report new measurements of the parity-violating single-spin asymmetry, $A_L$, and parity-conserving double-spin asymmetry, $A_{LL}$, for $W^\pm$ production as well as a first measurement of $A_L$ for $Z/\gamma^*$ production in longitudinally polarized proton collisions by the STAR experiment at RHIC.  The dependence of $A_L^{W^\pm}$ on the decay lepton pseudorapidity probes the flavor-separated quark and antiquark helicity-dependent PDFs at the $W$ mass scale.  A comparison to theoretical predictions based on different helicity-dependent PDFs suggests a positive up antiquark polarization in the range $0.05<x<0.2$.  The inclusion of this measurement in global analyses of RHIC and DIS data should significantly improve the determination of the polarization of up and down antiquarks in the proton and provide new input on the flavor symmetry of the proton's antiquark distributions.



Presentations after 2012 W AL preliminary result using final 2011 and 2012 data: