Comparison of BTOW status tables generated based on minB spectra collected by L2ped ( conventional method) vs. analysis of BHT3 triggered , inclusive spectra.

1. Details of the method are given at BTOW status table algo, pp 500 run, in short status is decided based on ADC integral [20,80] above pedestal.
2. the only adjusted param is 'threshold' for  Int[20,80]/Neve*1000. Two used values are 1.0 and 0.2.
3. For comparison I selected 2 fills: F10434 (day 85, ~all worked) and F10525 (day99, 2 small 'holes' in BTOW) - both have sufficient stats in minB spectra to produce conventional status table.
4. Matt suggested the following assignment of  BTOW status bits (value of 2^N is given)
   • good -->stat=1
   • bad, below thres=0.2 --> stat=2+16 (similar to minB  cold tower)
   • bad, below thres=1.0 --> stat=512 (new bit, stringent cut for dead towers for W analysis) 
   • stuck low bits --> stat=8 (not fatal for high-energy response expected for Ws)
   • broken FEE (the big hole) in some fills, soft ID [581-660] --> stat=0

Fig 1. Fill F10343 thres=1.0 (red line)

There are 108 towers below the red line, tagged as bad. Comparison to minB-based tower QA which tagged 100 towers. There are 4 combinations for tagging bad towers with 2 different algos. Table 1 shows break down, checking every tower. Attachments a, b show bad & good spectra.

Conclusion 1: some the additional 8 towers tagged as bad based on BHT3 spectra are either very low HV towers, or optical  fiber is partially broken. If those towers are kept for W analysis any ADC recorded by them would yield huge energy. I'd like to exclude them from W analysis anyhow.   

To preserve similarity to minB-based BTOW status code Matt agreed we tag as bad-for-everybody all towers rejected by BHT3 status code using lower threshold of 0.2. Towers  between BHT3 QA-thresholds [0.2,1.0] will be tagged with new bit in the offline DB and I'll reject them from W-analysis if looking for W-signal but not necessary if calculating the away side ET for vetoing of away side jet.

Spectra are in attachment c). Majority of towers for which this 2 methods do not agree have softID ~500 - where this 2 holes reside (see 3rd page in PDF)

Tower 220 has stuck lower bits, needs special treatment - I'll add detection (and Rebin()) for such cases.

Automated generation of BTOW status tables for  fills listed in Table 3  has been done, attachment d) shows summary of all towers and examples of bad towers for all those fills.

 Table 3
     1  # F10398w  nBadTw=112 totEve=12194 
     2  # F10399w  nBadTw=111 totEve=22226 
     3  # F10403w  nBadTw=136 totEve=3380 
     4  # F10404w  nBadTw=115 totEve=9762 
     5  # F10407w  nBadTw=116 totEve=7353 
     6  # F10412w  nBadTw=112 totEve=27518 
     7  # F10415w  nBadTw=185 totEve=19581 
     8  # F10434w  nBadTw=108 totEve=15854 
     9  # F10439w  nBadTw=188 totEve=21358 
    10  # F10448w  nBadTw=190 totEve=18809 
    11  # F10449w  nBadTw=192 totEve=18048 
    12  # F10450w  nBadTw=115 totEve=14129 
    13  # F10454w  nBadTw=121 totEve=6804 
    14  # F10455w  nBadTw=113 totEve=16971 
    15  # F10463w  nBadTw=114 totEve=12214 
    16  # F10465w  nBadTw=112 totEve=8825 
    17  # F10471w  nBadTw=193 totEve=21003 
    18  # F10476w  nBadTw=194 totEve=9067 
    19  # F10482w  nBadTw=114 totEve=39315 
    20  # F10486w  nBadTw=191 totEve=37155 
    21  # F10490w  nBadTw=154 totEve=31083 
    22  # F10494w  nBadTw=149 totEve=40130 
    23  # F10505w  nBadTw=146 totEve=37358 
    24  # F10507w  nBadTw=147 totEve=15814 
    25  # F10508w  nBadTw=150 totEve=16049 
    26  # F10525w  nBadTw=147 totEve=50666 
    27  # F10526w  nBadTw=147 totEve=32340 
    28  # F10527w  nBadTw=149 totEve=27351 
    29  # F10528w  nBadTw=147 totEve=22466 
    30  # F10531w  nBadTw=145 totEve=9210 
    31  # F10532w  nBadTw=150 totEve=11961 
    32  # F10535w  nBadTw=176 totEve=8605 
    33  # F10536w  nBadTw=177 totEve=10434