Difference between revisions of "CDC Future MC Studies Discussion, October 1, 2008"
(→Presentations) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Presentations == | == Presentations == | ||
| + | |||
| + | * GlueX-doc-1126 [http://argus.phys.uregina.ca/cgi-bin/private/DocDB/ShowDocument?docid=1126 Elton Smith] | ||
| + | Elton presented | ||
| + | the results of his studies of straight tracks going through the various geometries for the CDC. In doing this, | ||
| + | he looked at all possible "local" left-right combinations and computed the chi-square from the hit | ||
| + | residuals from these, and from the resulting fit track parameters. His figure-of-merit had to do with | ||
| + | how often more than one left-right combination gave a good track fit. The conclusions were that the | ||
| + | base-line design was not particularly good in terms of having a good geometry, and that either <i>close-packing</i>, | ||
| + | or <i>shifting</i> the layers could substantially improve this. It also appears that having sufficient local | ||
| + | information helps in this as well. For all the changed geometries, four layers of the same type appeared to | ||
| + | be sufficient. In the close pack, it looked like 3 was still OK. This would lead one to conclude that choosing four | ||
| + | with the close-pack would allow for a hit inefficiency without a substantial loss in efficiency. | ||
| + | |||
* [http://www.jlab.org/~marki/misc/twopass.pdf Mark Ito] | * [http://www.jlab.org/~marki/misc/twopass.pdf Mark Ito] | ||
| − | |||
Revision as of 14:41, 1 October 2008
Presentations
- GlueX-doc-1126 Elton Smith
Elton presented the results of his studies of straight tracks going through the various geometries for the CDC. In doing this, he looked at all possible "local" left-right combinations and computed the chi-square from the hit residuals from these, and from the resulting fit track parameters. His figure-of-merit had to do with how often more than one left-right combination gave a good track fit. The conclusions were that the base-line design was not particularly good in terms of having a good geometry, and that either close-packing, or shifting the layers could substantially improve this. It also appears that having sufficient local information helps in this as well. For all the changed geometries, four layers of the same type appeared to be sufficient. In the close pack, it looked like 3 was still OK. This would lead one to conclude that choosing four with the close-pack would allow for a hit inefficiency without a substantial loss in efficiency.
