Moore 16Mar05 Digits vs RDOs

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits: 

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits • Goal of study:  Compare Moore performance on a large sample of single-muon events digitized with the same release but persistified in either the form of RDOs or digits  Want to validate cabling maps to start using them in future simulation production • Sample:  20,000 single-muon events simulated with release 9.0.4  Re-digitized with release 10.0.0 and stored in 2 formats Digits files: /afs/cern.ch/user/w/willocq/public/RomeSimulation/PoolFileCatalog_Rome100Test_digits_singlemu_pt100gev.xml RDO files: /afs/cern.ch/user/w/willocq/public/RomeSimulation/PoolFileCatalog_Rome100Test2_RDOs_singlemu_pt100gev.xml  Plots in the following pages were selected to show differences

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits: 

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits • Moore pT resolution: DC2 preprod: sim+dig 8.0.5, rec 9.2.0 Rome Prod: sim+dig 9.0.4, rec 10.0.0 Rome test: sim 9.0.4, dig+rec 10.0.0 RDO Rome test: sim 9.0.4, dig+rec 10.0.0 Digits No difference T.Moore, S.Willocq

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits: 

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits • Moore efficiency: DC2 preprod: sim+dig 8.0.5, rec 9.2.0 Rome test: sim 9.0.4, dig+rec 10.0.0 RDO Rome Prod: sim+dig 9.0.4, rec 10.0.0 Rome test: sim 9.0.4, dig+rec 10.0.0 Digits

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits: 

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits • Moore efficiency vs. phi: BARREL Rome test: sim 9.0.4, dig+rec 10.0.0 RDO Rome Prod: sim+dig 9.0.4, rec 10.0.0 Rome test: sim 9.0.4, dig+rec 10.0.0 Digits Worse efficiency for RDOs in feet region

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits: 

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits • Moore efficiency vs. eta-phi: Rome test: sim 9.0.4, dig+rec 10.0.0 RDO Rome test: sim 9.0.4, dig+rec 10.0.0 Digits Worse efficiency for RDOs near |eta|=1 between BIM chambers (outside of rails)

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits: 

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits • Moore #phi hits on track vs. eta-phi: Rome test: sim 9.0.4, dig+rec 10.0.0 RDO Rome test: sim 9.0.4, dig+rec 10.0.0 Digits Reduced #RPC hits btw rails

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits: 

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits • Moore #phi hits on track: Rome test: sim 9.0.4, dig+rec 10.0.0 RDO Rome test: sim 9.0.4, dig+rec 10.0.0 Digits Extra RPC & TGC hits in specific chambers Station name from MuonIdHelper BOL T2E

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits: 

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits • Moore RPC and TGC phi hit normalized residuals: Rome test: sim 9.0.4, dig+rec 10.0.0 RDO Rome test: sim 9.0.4, dig+rec 10.0.0 Digits Shapes somewhat different  reflection of different chamber population?

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits: 

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits • Moore TGC phi hit uncertainties: Rome test: sim 9.0.4, dig+rec 10.0.0 RDO Rome test: sim 9.0.4, dig+rec 10.0.0 Digits Contributions below 6mm !?

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits: 

Initial Layout (Rome) MC: RDOs vs. Digits • Conclusions:  Moore performance with RDOs is very similar to that with digits but…  Lower efficiency in the feet region (mostly around |eta|=1)  Number of RPC hits lower in that region  RPC BOL and TGC T2E chambers have more hits relative to other RPC and TGC chambers Is this expected?  Some TGC hits have uncertainties < 6 mm What is this due to?  OK to go ahead and use RDOs for new simulation production