Comparison of test beam data from imaging calorimeters ... · AIDA-SLIDE-2015-033 AIDA Advanced European Infrastructures for Detectors at Accelerators Presentation Comparison of test

AIDA-SLIDE-2015-033

AIDAAdvanced European Infrastructures for Detectors at Accelerators

Presentation

Comparison of test beam data fromimaging calorimeters with GEANT4

simulations

Sicking, E (CERN)

03 July 2014

The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Commissionunder the FP7 Research Infrastructures project AIDA, grant agreement no. 262025.

This work is part of AIDA Work Package 9: Advanced infrastructures for detector R&D.

The electronic version of this AIDA Publication is available via the AIDA web site<http://cern.ch/aida> or on the CERN Document Server at the following URL:

<http://cds.cern.ch/search?p=AIDA-SLIDE-2015-033>

AIDA-SLIDE-2015-033

http://cern.ch/aida

http://cds.cern.ch/search?p=AIDA-SLIDE-2015-033

Comparison of test beam data fromimaging calorimeters with GEANT4 simulations

Eva Sicking (CERN)on behalf of the CALICE collaboration

July 3, 2014ICHEP 2014, Valencia, Spain

Eva Sicking (CERN) Geant4 Comparison to CALICE Data July 3, 2014 1 / 22

Introduction

Prototypes for highly granular calorimeters

Readout Silicon Scint. strips+ Scint. tiles+ RPCs RPCsPIN diodes Silicon Photo Silicon Photo (µMegas) (GEMs)

Multipliers Multipliers

Granularity 10×10×0.5 45×5×3 30×30×5 10×10×1.2 10×10×1.15(mm3)

Absorber W W Fe or W Fe Fe or W

Layer × 10×1.4+ 30×3.5 Fe: 38×21.4 48×20 Fe: 38×20thickness 10×2.8+ W: 38×10 W: 39×10(mm) 10×4.2


Introduction

CALICE test beam experiments

Test beam experiments in 2006-2012 at DESY, CERN, FNAL

Prototypes of up to ∼ 1m3, ∼ 2m3 including Tail Catcher

W-DHCALTCMT CERN

←−beam


Introduction

Geant4 Physics Lists

Hadronic interactions in Geant4 based on phenomenological modelsString parton models: QGS(P), FTF(P)Parametrised models: LEP, HEPCascade models: BERT, BICPrecompound model

Models are combined in “physics lists”

Model extension HPData driven High Precision neutron packageAssumed to be important for neutron rich absorbers


Validation of Detector Simulation using Electron Data

Validation of Detector Simulation

using Electron Data


Validation of Detector Simulation using Electron Data Silicon Tungsten ECAL

Si-W-ECAL: Electron linearity and resolution

Electromagnetic processes well understoodCross check detector calibrationUnderstand requirements for details needed in simulation

(MIPs)recE

Even

ts

Entries 36892

/ ndf 2χ 23.45 / 19

Constant 15.1± 2026

Mean 2.6± 7924

Sigma 2.5± 259

7000 7500 8000 8500 9000 95000

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

Entries 36892

/ ndf 2χ 23.45 / 19


Mean 2.6± 7924

Sigma 2.5± 259

Gauss Fit

CALICE 2006 data

Monte Carlo

(GeV)beamE5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

(M

IPs)

mea

nE

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000 / ndf 2χ 17.64 / 32

Prob 0.9812

p0 11.13± −96.25 p1 0.4802± 266.5

/ ndf 2χ 17.64 / 32

Prob 0.9812

α 11.13± 96.25 β 0.4802± 266.5

CALICE 2006 data

(GeV) beam E1/0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4

( %

)m

eas

) / E

mea

s(Eσ

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9 / ndf 2χ 1.835 / 6

p0

p1 ±

/ ndf

CALICE 2006 data

2

Monte Carlo

χ 30.69 / 32

s 0.14± 16.53

c 0.07± 1.07

Electrons at 6-45 GeV NIM A608 2009 372

Reconstructed energy of data and simulation agree within 1 %

Linearity: Erec versus Ebeam, agreement with linear dependence within 1 %

Energy resolution:σE

E≈ a√

E⊕b→ 16.6%√

E⊕1.1%,

17.0%√E⊕0.8%

30 GeV e−

Linearity Energy resolution

Geant4 version 9.3


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168900209014673

Validation of Detector Simulation using Electron Data Silicon Tungsten ECAL

Si-W-ECAL: Electron linearity and resolution

Electromagnetic processes well understoodCross check detector calibrationUnderstand requirements for details needed in simulation

(MIPs)recE

Even

ts

Entries 36892

/ ndf 2χ 23.45 / 19


Mean 2.6± 7924

Sigma 2.5± 259

7000 7500 8000 8500 9000 95000

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

Entries 36892

/ ndf 2χ 23.45 / 19


Mean 2.6± 7924

Sigma 2.5± 259

Gauss Fit

CALICE 2006 data

Monte Carlo

(GeV)beamE5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

(M

IPs)

mea

nE

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000 / ndf 2χ 17.64 / 32

Prob 0.9812

p0 11.13± −96.25 p1 0.4802± 266.5

/ ndf 2χ 17.64 / 32

Prob 0.9812

α 11.13± 96.25 β 0.4802± 266.5

CALICE 2006 data

(GeV) beam E1/0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4

( %

)m

eas

) / E

mea

s(Eσ

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9 / ndf 2χ 1.835 / 6

p0

p1 ±

/ ndf

CALICE 2006 data

2

Monte Carlo

χ 30.69 / 32

s 0.14± 16.53

c 0.07± 1.07

Electrons at 6-45 GeV NIM A608 2009 372


Linearity: Erec versus Ebeam, agreement with linear dependence within 1 %

Energy resolution:σE

E≈ a√

E⊕b→ 16.6%√

E⊕1.1%,

17.0%√E⊕0.8%

30 GeV e−

Linearity Energy resolution

Geant4 version 9.3


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168900209014673

Validation of Detector Simulation using Electron Data Scintillator Steel Analog HCAL

Sc-Fe-AHCAL: Positron linearity and resolution

[GeV]recoE6 8 10 12 14

#e

ntr

ies [

a.u

.]

0

0.05

0.1

0.150.01) GeV±0.01) GeV Sigma: (0.69±data Mean: (9.87

0.01) GeV±0.01) GeV Sigma: (0.65±MC Mean: (9.90

CALICE

[GeV]beamE0 10 20 30 40 50 60

[G

eV

]re

co

E0

10

20

30

40

50

60 0.4) MIP/GeV± = (42.0 MCw

0.4) MIP/GeV± = (42.3 dataw

data w/o saturation correction

CALICE

[GeV]beamE0 10 20 30 40 50

/E [%

]E

σ

0

5

10

15

20

25

AHCAL

MC

MiniCal

CALICE

Positrons at 10-50 GeV 2011 JINST 6 P04003


Agreement with linearity within 3 % (1 % up to 30 GeV)

Energy resolution21.9%√

E⊕1.0%,

21.5%√E⊕0.7%

Corrections are under control, e. g. saturation

Geant4 version 9.4.p02


http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-0221/6/04/P04003/

Validation of Detector Simulation using Electron Data Scintillator Tungsten Analog HCAL

Sc-W-AHCAL: Positron linearity and resolution 1-6 GeV

Energy sum [MIP]0 50 100 150

Ent

ries/

1.0

MIP

0

1000

2000

3000

+2 GeV e 0.07± = 51.84 µ 0.004± = 0.052 τ 0.03± = 11.20 σ

/ndf = 1.52χ

Data

Simulation

CALICE W-AHCAL

[GeV]beam

p0 2 4 6

[MIP

]⟩

vis

E⟨

50

100

150

CALICE W-AHCAL

+eDataSimulation

[GeV]beam

p0 2 4 6S

imul

atio

n/D

ata

0.90

0.95

1.00

1.05

0

[GeV]beam

p0 2 4 6

/EEσ

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4+e

Data

Simulation

CALICE W-AHCAL

[GeV]beam

p0 2 4 6S

imul

atio

n/D

ata

0.90

0.95

1.00

1.05

0

Positrons at 1-6 GeV JINST 9 (2014) 01004

Reconstructed energy in data and simulation agree within 2 %, resolution within 5 %

Stochastic term of energy resolution a = 29.6%, a = 29.2%→ Coarser sampling in W than in Fe



http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-0221/9/01/P01004/pdf/1748-0221_9_01_P01004.pdf

Geant4 Comparison to Hadron Data

Geant4 Comparison to Hadron Data


Geant4 Comparison to Hadron Data Silicon Tungsten ECAL

Si-W-ECAL: Fraction of interacting pions

Pions at 2-10 GeV and 8-80 GeV in Si-W-ECAL CAN-050 2010 JINST 5 P05007

Highly granular calorimeter allows to study shower shape and substructure

0

10

20

30

40

50

xdi

rect

ion

(pad

num

ber)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

z direction (layer number)

CALICE preliminarySi-W-ECAL

Energ

y d

ep

ositio

n(a

.u.)

10 GeV Pion

Incoming pion energy [GeV]

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11In

tera

ctio

n fr

actio

n0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

FNAL 2008-πQGSP_BERT

FTFP_BERT

FTFP_BERT_HP

QBBC

Si-W ECALCALICE preliminary

Study fraction of interacting pions in Si-W-ECAL of ∼ 1λI (24 X0)

Models agree with data at ≤ 4 GeVAt 6-10 GeV, the models overestimate the interacting fraction by 4 %



https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/CALICE/CaliceAnalysisNotes/can050.pdf

http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-0221/5/05/P05007

Geant4 Comparison to Hadron Data Silicon Tungsten ECAL

Si-W-ECAL: Longitudinal and radial energy profile

Shower depth [pseudolayer]

0 10 20 30 40 50

/pse

udol

ayer

[MIP

]de

p<

E>

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

FNAL 2008-π

FTFP_BERT

FTFP_BERT_HP



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

[pse

udol

ayer

]E

<Z

>

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16 FNAL 2008-π

QGSP_BERT

FTFP_BERT

FTFP_BERT_HP

QBBC


Radial distance [mm]

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

/eve

nt [M

IP]

dep

<E

>

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20 FNAL 2008-π

FTFP_BERT

FTFP_BERT_HP



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

[mm

]E

<R

>

16

16.5

17

17.5

18

18.5

19

19.5

20

20.5

21

FNAL 2008-πQGSP_BERTFTFP_BERTFTFP_BERT_HPQBBC


Models deposit toomuch energy near theinteraction layer

Effect increasing withbeam momentum

Radial energy profilesbest described by QBBC

FTFP models depositenergy too close toshower axis,QGSP BERT showsopposite effect

Hit distributions(longitudinal and radial)are well reproducedby MC


CAN-050

10 GeV π

10 GeV π


https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/CALICE/CaliceAnalysisNotes/can050.pdf

Geant4 Comparison to Hadron Data Scintillator Steel Analog HCAL

Sc-Fe-AHCAL: Pion linearity

Pions at 8-100 GeV 2013 JINST 8 P07005

[GeV]beam

p0 20 40 60 80 100

[G

eV

]⟩

rec

E⟨

50

100 DATA

FTFP_BERT

CALICE Fe−AHCAL

[GeV]beam

p0 20 40 60 80 100

[G

eV

]⟩

rec

E⟨

50

100

[GeV]beam

p

10210

MC

/ D

AT

A

0.8

0.9

1

1.1

1.2

FTFP_BERT 9.4p02FTFP_BERT 9.3p02FTFP_BERT 9.2p04

CALICE FeAHCAL

[GeV]beam

p

10210

MC

/ D

AT

A

0.8

0.9

1

1.1

1.2

[GeV]beam

p

10210

MC

/ D

AT

A

0.8

0.9

1

1.1

1.2

QGSP_BERTQGSP_FTFP_BERTQBBC

CALICE FeAHCAL

[GeV]beam

p

10210

MC

/ D

AT

A

0.8

0.9

1

1.1

1.2

[GeV]beam

p

10210

FTFP_BERT

FTF_BIC

CALICE Fe−AHCAL

[GeV]beam

p

10210

[GeV]beam

p

10210

LHEP

CHIPS

CALICE Fe−AHCAL

[GeV]beam

p

10210

FTFP BERTperformance varieswith Geant4 version

Lists includingBERT-model agreewithin 4 % at lowenergies,within 10 % at highenergies



http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/8/07/P07005


Sc-Fe-AHCAL: Analogue vs (semi-)digital readout

Comparison of 3 readout options using same prototype and datasetof pions at 10-80 GeV CAN-049

Analogue: Measure energy depositionDigital: Count number of hits above threshold Nhits

Semi-digital: Count number of hits above thresholds N1, N2, and N3

[GeV]rec,digitalE10 210

no

rma

lize

d #

en

trie

s

310

210


no

rma

lize

d #

en

trie

s

310

210

FeAHCAL preliminaryCALICE

Agreement between data and FTFP BERT indigital and semi-digital read-out within ±10%

Digital MC resolution shifted to lower energies

>re

c/<

Ere

cσ

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

>re

c/<

Ere

cσ

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25Analogue

Digital

SemiDigital

Analogue w/TCMT

Analogue w/TCMT (with SC)


[GeV]beamE0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

beam

)/E

beam

>E

rec

(<E

0.06

0.04

0.02

0

0.02

0.04

0.06


color = data

black = FTFP BERT

Data only

AHCAL not optimised for (semi-)digital readout

[GeV]beamE0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

>re

c,d

igital

/<E

rec,d

igital

σ

0.15

0.16

0.17

0.18

0.19

0.2

0.21

0.22

[GeV]beamE0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

>re

c,d

igital

/<E

rec,d

igital

σ

0.15

0.16

0.17

0.18

0.19

0.2

0.21

0.22

Data

Data fit

FTFP_BERT

FTFP_BERT fit


[GeV]beamE0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

>re

c,S

Dcorr

/<E

rec,S

Dcorr

σ

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

0.22

[GeV]beamE0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

>re

c,S

Dcorr

/<E

rec,S

Dcorr

σ

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

0.22

Data

Data fit

FTFP_BERT

FTFP_BERT fit


Digital

Semi-digital


https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/CALICE/CaliceAnalysisNotes/CAN-049.pdf


Sc-Fe-AHCAL: Analogue vs (semi-)digital readout

Comparison of 3 readout options using same prototype and datasetof pions at 10-80 GeV CAN-049

Analogue: Measure energy depositionDigital: Count number of hits above threshold Nhits

Semi-digital: Count number of hits above thresholds N1, N2, and N3


no

rma

lize

d #

en

trie

s

310

210


no

rma

lize

d #

en

trie

s

310

210


Agreement between data and FTFP BERT indigital and semi-digital read-out within ±10%

Digital MC resolution shifted to lower energies

>re

c/<

Ere

cσ

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

>re

c/<

Ere

cσ

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25Analogue

Digital

SemiDigital

Analogue w/TCMT

Analogue w/TCMT (with SC)


[GeV]beamE0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

beam

)/E

beam

>E

rec

(<E

0.06

0.04

0.02

0

0.02

0.04

0.06


color = data

black = FTFP BERT

Data only

AHCAL not optimised for (semi-)digital readout




Sc-Fe-AHCAL: Parametrisation of hadron shower profiles

]Ieffλz from shower start [

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

)Ief

fλ

E in

laye

r [M

IP] (

laye

r=0.

137

∆

0

20

40

60

80

100

120+π

DATA 40 GeV/ndf: 15.2/27 = 0.562χFit

f: ( 23.4 +- 1.1)%: 4.33 +- 0.28shortα

0

eff: ( 1.75 +- 0.13)Xshort

β: 1.44 +- 0.01longα

Ieffλ: ( 1.27 +- 0.02)

longβ

CALICE Fe-AHCAL Preliminary

(a)

Logitudinal and radial shower shape for pions andprotons at 10-80 GeV CAN-048

Fit of longitudinal shower shape using

∆E = A ·

f ·exp(− z

βshort)

βshort ·Γ(αshort)·(

z

βshort

)αshort−1+

(1− f ) ·exp(− zβlong

)

βlong ·Γ(αlong)·

(z

βlong

)αlong−1

MC overestimates fraction of short componentexcept FTFP BERT for protons

Tail parameters well described by MC

Beam momentum [GeV/c]0 20 40 60 80 100

f

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8proton Data

Data+πproton FTFP_BERT

FTFP_BERT+πproton QGSP_BERT

QGSP_BERT+π


(a)


f, M

C/D

ata

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5+π

Data

FTFP_BERT

QGSP_BERT


(b)


f, M

C/D

ata

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5proton

Data

FTFP_BERT

QGSP_BERT


(c)





Sc-Fe-AHCAL: Parametrisation of hadron shower profiles

]Ieffλz from shower start [

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

)Ief

fλ

E in

laye

r [M

IP] (

laye

r=0.

137

∆

0

20

40

60

80

100

120+π

DATA 40 GeV/ndf: 15.2/27 = 0.562χFit

f: ( 23.4 +- 1.1)%: 4.33 +- 0.28shortα

0

eff: ( 1.75 +- 0.13)Xshort

β: 1.44 +- 0.01longα

Ieffλ: ( 1.27 +- 0.02)

longβ


(a)

Logitudinal and radial shower shape for pions andprotons at 10-80 GeV CAN-048

Fit of longitudinal shower shape using

∆E = A ·

f ·exp(− z

βshort)

βshort ·Γ(αshort)·(

z

βshort

)αshort−1+

(1− f ) ·exp(− zβlong

)

βlong ·Γ(αlong)·

(z

βlong

)αlong−1

MC overestimates fraction of short componentexcept FTFP BERT for protons

Tail parameters well described by MC


f

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8proton Data

Data+πproton FTFP_BERT

FTFP_BERT+πproton QGSP_BERT

QGSP_BERT+π


(a)


f, M

C/D

ata

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5+π

Data

FTFP_BERT

QGSP_BERT


(b)


f, M

C/D

ata

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5proton

Data

FTFP_BERT

QGSP_BERT


(c)




Geant4 Comparison to Hadron Data Scintillator Tungsten Analog HCAL

Sc-W-AHCAL: Pion, proton and kaon response

[GeV]beam

p0 20 40 60 80 100

[MIP

s]⟩

vis

E⟨

1000

2000

3000

CALICE Preliminary

+πW-AHCAL 2011,

DataQGSP_BERT_HPFTFP_BERT_HP

[GeV]beam

p0 20 40 60 80 100S

imul

atio

n/D

ata

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.10

[GeV]beam

p0 20 40 60 80 100

[MIP

s]⟩

vis

E⟨

1000

2000

3000

CALICE Preliminary

W-AHCAL 2011, protonsData

QGSP_BERT_HPQGSP_BIC_HP

FTFP_BERT_HP

[GeV]beam

p0 20 40 60 80 100S

imul

atio

n/D

ata

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.10

W-AHCAL energy sum [MIPs]1000 1500 2000 2500

15.

0 M

IPs)

⋅en

trie

s ∑

Ent

ries/

(

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

CALICE Preliminary

Data

QGSP_BERT_HP

QGSP_BIC_HP

FTFP_BERT_HP

= 50 GeVbeam

, p+K

Pion, protons and kaons at 3-10 GeV JINST 9 2014 01004 and 25-100 GeV CAN-044

Good agreement between data and QGSP BERT HP and FTFP BERT HP

QGSP BIC HP underestimates data slightly (within uncertainties)



http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-0221/9/01/P01004/pdf/1748-0221_9_01_P01004.pdf


Geant4 Comparison to Hadron Data Scintillator Tungsten Analog HCAL

Sc-W-AHCAL: Proton shower shapes

1 2 3 4 5

Ene

rgy

per

laye

r [M

IPs]

100

200

300CALICE Preliminary

= 100 GeVbeam

Protons, p

Data

QGSP_BERT_HP

QGSP_BIC_HP

FTFP_BERT_HP

]Iλz [1 2 3 4 5S

imul

atio

n/D

ata

0.5

1.0

1.5

Radius [mm]0 100 200 300 400

2M

IPs/

evt/c

m ⟩

vis

E⟨

-410

-310

-210

-110

1

CALICE Preliminary

= 100 GeVbeam

Protons, p

Data

QGSP_BERT_HP

QGSP_BIC_HP

FTFP_BERT_HP

Radius [mm]0 100 200 300 400

Sim

ulat

ion/

Dat

a0.60.81.01.21.4

QGSP BERT HP and QGSP BIC HP overestimate energy depositionin first part of showerRadial profile: Models overestimate energy density in shower core CAN-044




Geant4 Comparison to Hadron Data Shower Substructure

Sc-Fe-AHCAL: Substructure of hadronic shower

Beam

Identifiedtrack segments

CALICE

Pions at 10-80 GeV in AHCAL2013 JINST 8 P09001

Identify track segments ofminimum-ionising particles withinhadron showers

Best agreement between data andQGSP BERT and FTFP BERT

Agreement crucial for simulation studiesof Particle Flow Analysis

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Mean M

ultip

licity

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

2.2

2.4

FTFP_BERT

LHEPQGSP_BERT

QGS_BIC

DataCALICE

Energy [GeV]10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Resid

ual

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

[cm

]tr

ack

λ 10

11

12

13

14

15

16 FTFP_BERT

LHEP

QGSP_BERT

QGS_BIC

Data

CALICE

Energy [GeV]10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Resid

ual

0

0.05

0.1

0.15



http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-0221/8/09/P09001/

Geant4 Comparison to Hadron Data Shower Substructure

Fe-SDHCAL: Substructure of hadronic shower

SDHCAL Layer

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50X (cm)

0102030405060708090

Y (

cm)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Mea

n #

reco

nstr

uted

trac

ks0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

FTFP_BERT_HPQGSP_BERT_HPLHEPSDHCAL DATA

CALICE Preliminary (a)

[GeV]beamE0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

MC

/Dat

a

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

1.1

(b)

]π in

tλ

Mea

n tr

ack

leng

th [

1

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.7

1.8

1.9

2

FTFP_BERT_HPQGSP_BERT_HPLHEPSDHCAL DATA

CALICE Preliminary (a)

[GeV]beamE0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

MC

/Dat

a

0.9

0.95

1

1.05

(b)

Pions at 10-80 GeV in SDHCAL CAN-047

Identify track segments of minimum-ionising particles within showers

Best agreement between data and QGSP BERT and FTFP BERT

Agreement crucial for simulation studies of Particle Flow Analysis




Geant4 Comparison to Hadron Data Shower Time Structure

T3B: Time structure of hadronic showers

100 cm

44.9 cm

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 140

T3B: Tungsten Timing Test Beam

Scintillator cells placed behind HCAL

Read out 3000×800 ps ≈ 2 µs tosample the full shower development

CAN-038 arXiv:1404.6454

Time structure of hadronic showers

Delayed component due tonuclear deexcitation,neutron propagation etc.

Time of First Hit [ns]0 50 100 150 200

/ 0

.8 n

shits

N6

10

510

410

310

210

110

1

+ cslowτ

t

e⋅ slow

+ Afastτ

t

e⋅ fast

f(t) = A

60 GeV hadrons tungsten

= 480 ns, c = 5.5E06slow

τ = 8.7 ns, fast

τ

60 GeV hadrons steel

= 76 ns, c = 3.1E06slow

τ = 7.7 ns, fast

τ

180 GeV muons

c = 1.2E06

CALICE T3B

Pions in tungsten show more late hittime entries than steel

Reference measurement of muons



http://arxiv.org/abs/arXiv:1404.6454

Geant4 Comparison to Hadron Data Shower Time Structure

T3B: Time distribution


/0.8

ns

hits

N

610

510

410

310

210

110

1

60 GeV hadrons steel

Data

QBBC

QGSP_BERT_HP

QGSP_BERT

CALICE T3B


/0.8

ns

hits

N

510

410

310

210

110

1


Data

QBBC

QGSP_BERT_HP

QGSP_BERT

CALICE T3B

Shower Radius [cm]0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Me

an

Tim

e o

f F

irst

Hit [

ns]

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16


Data

QBBC

QGSP_BERT_HP

QGSP_BERT

CALICE T3B

High precision (HP) neutrontracking improves agreementfor tungsten

Late energy deposits are moreimportant in the outer regionsof a shower



Summary

Summary

Test beam experiments with ECAL and HCAL prototypes

Test of novel technologies in large-scale calorimetersDemonstration of detector calibration capabilitiesCharacterisation of prototypes: linearity, resolutionMeasurement of particle shower evolution

Validate detector simulations using electromagnetic processes

Overall good agreement between data and detector simulation

Test models of hadronic nuclear interactions

Geant4 models reproduce hadronic data within few percentHigh precision (HP) neutron tracking improves tungsten HCAL simulationNovel test of shower substructure and time structure

Stay tuned for more CALICE results, e. g. HCALs with gaseous readout


Backup

Backup


Backup

CALICE

CAlorimetry for LInear Collider Experiments

International R&D collaboration, ∼ 330 members

Development of imaging calorimeters for experiments athigh-energy e+e− colliders

Build and test calorimeterprototypes

Demonstrate that the requiredperformance of the calorimetersystem can be achieved

Compare results to MCpredictions


Backup

Calorimeters for future lepton colliders

Jet energy resolution goal

5-3.5 % for 50 GeV to 1 TeV jets

Possible solutionParticle Flow Analysis

Low mass trackerfor charged particlesHigh granularity ECALfor photonsHigh granularity HCALfor neutral hadrons

CALICE builds and tests prototypes ofhighly granular calorimeters

Demonstration that the requiredperformance of the calorimeter systemcan be achieved

Comparison of results to MC predictions

ECAL Cell Size/cm0 1 2 3

[%]

jet

/E90

rms

3

3.5

4

4.5

5a)

45 GeV Jets100 GeV Jets180 GeV Jets250 GeV Jets

HCAL Cell Size/cm0 2 4 6 8 10

[%]

jet

/E90

rms

3

3.5

4

4.5

5b) 45 GeV Jets

100 GeV Jets180 GeV Jets250 GeV Jets

NIM A611 2009 25


http://arxiv.org/abs/arXiv:0907.3577

Backup

International Linear Collider (ILC)

Superconducting RF cavities

Gradient: 32MV/m

Energy: ∼ 500GeV(upgradable to 1TeV)

Luminosity: few 1034 cm−2s−1


Backup

Compact Linear Collider (CLIC)

2-beam acceleration scheme

Operated at room temperature

Gradient: 100MV/m

Energy: ∼ 375GeV to 3TeV

Luminosity: few 1034 cm−2s−1


Backup

Detector simulations: Example Sc-W-AHCAL

1597 mm

TCMT159 mm z=0

WCh1

−18 mm−33 mm

Sc1 WCh2 WCh3 Sc2

−956 mm−306 mm

−415 mm−430 mm

−873 mm−888 mm

489 mmT3B

z

W−AHCAL

beam

Geant4 detector simulation

Full setup including beam instrumentationParticle generation using gun simulationBeam position, direction and spread corresponding to data runs

Digitisation

Realistic detector granularityOptical cross talk between neighbouring scintillator tilesBirk’s lawSimulated readout electronics: signal shaping time, noiseSaturation effects


Documents

Comparison of test beam data from imaging calorimeters ... · AIDA-SLIDE-2015-033 AIDA Advanced European Infrastructures for Detectors at Accelerators Presentation Comparison of test