AtlasPublicTopicHeader.png

Approved Muon Spectrometer Plots

Introduction

Approved plots that can be shown by ATLAS speakers at conferences and similar events.
Please do not add figures on your own. Contact the muon system project leader in case of questions and/or suggestions.
Note: Description of the approval procedure (restricted access)

See the Muon Combined Performance public plots page for muon combined performance results.

Plots from published papers

Title Plots and more info Date
Performance of the ATLAS RPC detector and Level-1 muon barrel trigger at s√=13 plots MDET-2019-01 25 February 2021
Resolution of the ATLAS muon spectrometer monitored drift tubes in LHC Run 2 plots MDET-2018-01 28 June 2019

Plots from public notes

Title Plots and more info Date
Performance of the muon spectrometer alignment in 2017 and 2018 data plots ATL-MUON-PUB-2021-002 01 March 2021
Measurement of Tracking Resolution in a sMDT Chamber plots ATL-MUON-PUB-2021-001 05 February 2021

Preliminary Plots

Title Plots and more info Date
New Small Wheel trigger plots from 2022 collisions plots ATL-COM-MUON-2023-007 06 March 2023
New Small Wheel performance plots plots ATL-COM-MUON-2023-006 06 March 2023
Micromegas performance results from at beam test with VMM readout at GIF++ plots ATL-COM-MUON-2023-005 28 February 2023
New Small Wheel performance plots plots ATL-COM-MUON-2022-066 09 December 2022
Occupancy plots for the sTGC chambers plots ATL-COM-MUON-2022-055 03 November 2022
Micromegas trigger simulation plots plots ATL-COM-MUON-2022-039 29 September 2022
RPC DCS Data Analysis plots ATL-COM-MUON-2022-040 23 September 2022
Muon STG plot from early run-3 operations plots ATL-COM-MUON-2022-036 12 September 2022
Muon plots from early run-3 operations plots ATL-COM-MUON-2022-035 12 September 2022
Muon endcap toroid-on chamber shifts plots ATL-COM-MUON-2022-018 31 May 2022
NSW May splashes analysis plots plots ATL-COM-MUON-2022-017 30 May 2022
BIS78 sMDT surface commissioning results plots ATL-COM-MUON-2021-046 16 September 2021
Average BIS78 sMDT tube hit efficiency in BB5 plots ATL-COM-MUON-2021-026 04 June 2021
RPC Detector Performance in 2018 with proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV plots ATL-COM-MUON-2020-031 22 July 2020
Eta-meter for the muon spectrometer ATL-COM-MUON-2018-019 07 May 2018

Muon Operations Plots

Title Plots and more info Date
ROC Phase Calibration of the NSW detector using micromegas of sector A10 plots ATL-COM-MUON-2022-009 22 March 2022
Certification of a new generation of Resistive Plate Chambers for the Phase-1 BIS78 upgrade of the ATLAS Muon Spectrometer plots ATL-COM-MUON-2021-014 23 May 2021
Studies of gas gaps current density in the ATLAS RPC detector during 2018 data taking at Large Hadron Collider plots ATL-COM-MUON-2020-001 04 February 2020
Plots of Dark Current in ATLAS Endcap Alignment CCDs ATL-COM-MUON-2019-058 14 October 2019
Count of SEU in Kintex-7 FPGA for TGC Electronics Upgrade plots ATL-COM-MUON-2019-012 24 April 2019
TGC operation performance plots in Run 2 plots ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007 21 February 2019
TGC noise burst plot and event display plots ATL-COM-MUON-2016-057 26 November 2016

Older Plots

Show  Hide 

Figures in JINST 3:S08003,2008

Figures 1 to 6 are coloured versions of Figures 10.32, 10.33, 10.35, 10.36, 10.37, 10.38 published in the ATLAS detector paper
published in JINST 3:S08003,2008.

Nomenclature used in Figures 1 to 6:
  • stand-alone = muon reconstructed with the muon spectrometer stand-alone; the muon momentum is corrected for the energy loss in the calorimeters by the expected energy loss;
  • combined = muon reconstructed with the muon spectrometer and the inner detector;
  • all = stand-alone + combined muons + inner detector tracks tagged by track segments in the muon spectrometer.

Fig. 1: For muons with pT = 100 GeV, expected fractional momentum resolution as a function of the pseudrapidity for stand-alone and combined reconstruction. The degradation in the region with 1.1 < |n| < 1.7 is due to the absence of the middle muon stations in the barrel/end-cap transition region for the initial data-taking, to the low bending power of the magnetic field in the transition region between the barrel and end-cap toroids and to the material of the coils of the end-cap toroids.
res_vs_eta.png
Fig. 2: For muons with pT = 100 GeV, expected fractional momentum resolution as a function of the azimuth for stand-alone and combined reconstruction. The resolution is degraded at 240° and 300° , due to the additional material introduced by the feet which support the barrel part of the detector.
res_vs_phi.png
Fig. 3: Expected stand-alone and combined fractional momentum resolution as a function of the transverse momentum for single muons with |n| < 1.1.
res_vs_pt_barrel.png
Fig. 4: Expected stand-alone and combined fractional momentum resolution as a function of the transverse momentum for single muons with |n| > 1.7.
res_vs_pt_endcap.png
Fig. 5: Efficiency for reconstructing muons with pT = 100 GeV as a function of |n|. The results are shown for stand-alone reconstruction, combined reconstruction and for the combination of these with the segment tags.
eff_vs_eta.png
Fig. 6: Efficiency for reconstructing muons as a function of the transverse momentum . The results are shown for stand-alone reconstruction, combined reconstruction and for the combination of these with the segment tags.
eff_vs_pt.png
Fig. 7: The plot shows the measured sagitta, in the precision plane, for cosmics taken without magnetic field in the middle barrel chamber BML2C03 of muon spectrometer. For a properly aligned tower the mean value of the sagitta is expected to be inside required 30 microns level. The three plots show the sagitta distribution for three different geometries : the red distribution is obtained using nominal geometry, the blue one using the optical alignment system based geometry and the green one is obtained after alignment with straight tracks ( for further details please contact potrap@mppmuNOSPAMPLEASE.mpg.de).
 trk_resid_BML2C03_new.
Fig. 8: The plot shows "track" sagittas calculated from segments in the stations EI-EM-EO before and after applying alignment corrections determined by the optical alignment system of the endcaps. We do not actually use any of the tracking algorithms, instead we define as a "track" a triplet of segments that have passed our selection cuts. The sagitta is then calculated in the usual way as the distance in the precision coordinate of the EM segment from the line joining the EI-EO segments.

The "nominal chamber positions" histogram reflects the positioning accuracy that we have reached in the endcaps - typically 5mm rms in all coordinates for the chambers within a wheel, but up to 25mm displacements of entire wheels along ATLAS-Z. The EM station is displaced significantly along ATLAS-Z on the A-side, but not on the C-side, which is the main contribution to the difference between sides A and C.

The "after alignment corrections" histogram should, for the optical alignment to be ok, be centered at zero and have a width that can be explained by effects other than random chamber misalignment. We observe a mean value of -48 +/- 54mu, thus compatible with zero, and a width of 1.5mm, compatible with the expected multiple-scattering width (as a benchmark, for 40GeV muons at theta=30 degrees the expected width from a single-muon simulation is 1.4mm).

We conclude that, with the statistics available at this moment, we see no indication of the optical alignment being not ok within the claimed accuracy of 45-50mu.

sagitta-public.pdf
Fig. 9: The plot shows the difference in angle (in the precision coordinate) of the three segments of a "track" from the line joining the EI and EO segments. Each "track" = segment triplet contributes three entries to the histogram. We cut at +/-10mrad in this plot in order to remove background from wrong segment combinations (this also discards very-low momentum muons).

Segment positions (being some sort of average over all the hits in a chamber) are much less affected by calibration (t0 and r(t) function) than segment angles (being some sort of difference between hits), and thus the width of this distribution, even after alignment corrections, is significantly larger than expected from simulation (for 40GeV muons at theta=30 degrees the expected width is around 0.5mrad).
Fig. 10: Resolution plot temporarily removed

Fig. 11: The plot shows the global occupancy of MDT multilayers over the full detector divided in INNER, MIDDLE, and OUTER layer of chambers

Fig. 12: The plot shows the Residuals for MDT chambers after applying T0 refit on cosmic muons, the residuals have been fitted with a double gaussian and the narrower one is 105 micron wide.
Fig. 13: The plot shows the hit profile and the efficiency for an MDT barrel sector, both from the hit profile and the efficiency plot the presence of a dead wire is visible.
Fig. 14: Segment efficiency per MDT chamber for cosmics.

Efficiency is determined using Muon Spectrometer tracks with segments in two or more station layers (Inner/Middle/Outer). By selecting one layer, for example the Inner layer, and requiring a track with segments in the Middle and Outer layers that crosses the Inner layer, the number of missed segments in the Inner layer and the corresponding efficiency is determined. Note that the segment (here in the Inner Layer) is not required to lie on the track. For the extrapolation an ideal cilinder without chamber cut outs is used. This means that in the feet region and the RIBs small inefficiencies are expected due to the limited chamber coverage.

Results are for Mdt chambers after acceptance and minimum number of events cuts BI BO station |eta| = 2-4 and EI |eta| = 1-2, EO EM and BM no cuts, one chamber was removed. Results after these cuts for 322 Barrel and 339 Endcap chambers.

Average segment efficiency Barrel Inner 98.7 % Barrel Middle 99.2 % Barrel Outer 99.6 % Endcap Inner 99.2 % Endcap Middle 99.8 % Endcap Outer 99.9 % Total average segment efficiency 99.5 ± 0.5 %



Fig. 15: Plot shows segment efficiency for station eta vs phi, for the Barrel Middle MDT chambers (BM). The method is described in caption of Fig 14. The RIB structure can be observed.

Fig. 16: Segment Efficiency for Endcap Middle Chambers as Fig 15. One chamber that is off can be observed. .
Fig. 17: Status of the coverage for the Low Pt trigger in the Barrel for a cosmic run taken in September 2009.
Fig. 18: Cosmics muon map reconstructed by off-line RPC standalone muon monitoring projected on surface (y=81m).The tracking is based on RPC space points, which are defined by orthogonal RPC cluster hits. The pattern recognition is seeded by a straight line defined by two space points belonging to the two Middle planes. Space points not part of any previous track and inside a predefined distance from the straight line are associated to the pattern. Patterns with points in at least 3 out of 4 layers in Middle planes are retained and a linear interpolation is performed in the two orthogonal views.
Fig. 19: Spatial correlation between MDT tubes and RPC eta hits with cosmic data.The picture shows the scatter plot between MDT tubes z coordinate and RPC eta hits z coordinate of the same chamber along sector 7 for the Middle chamber. There is no clean-up cuts but an ADC cut > 50 on MDT Front-end response to reject MDT random hits. The blue squares are due to uncorrelated hits and show the station geometrical boundary along the z-axis.
Fig. 20: Time alignment inside Low Pt trigger towers in phi view with cosmic data.The plot shows the distribution of the relative time between RPC layers of Low Pt non-bending view coincidence matrix delivering one and only one hardware trigger in the event. The time is relative to the layer nearest to the IP.
Fig. 21: RPC distribution of single channel noise counting rate per unit area measured with random triggers. The noise is referred to the front-end channel and is calculated by the total number of hits divided by the total number of random triggers and the readout window (200 ns) normalized by the equivalent strip surface. The definition of the equivalent strip surface takes into account the wire-or and the logical-or in phi view.

Fig. 22: Distribution of RPC hits per event with RPC cosmic trigger (not filled area) and with random trigger (black filled area). The distributions correspond to the RPC detector occupancy due to cosmics and uncorrelated noise.
Fig. 23: RPC spatial correlation between trigger strip number and confirm strip number in phi view for a programmed trigger road in cosmics data. The trigger strip corresponds to the Pivot plane strip which caused the trigger to fire for the given threshold. The confirm strip corresponds to the Low Pt plane of the triggered chamber. It is possible to see the trigger road projective pattern by the deviation of the data points from the dashed line. Strip number 0 corresponds to the center of the geometrical sector.

Fig. 24: TGC hits distribution in x-y plane for A side on run 91060. Hit positions are calculated from coincidence of wire eta hits and strip phi hits. Only bottom sectors (sector 8~12) are used for triggerring (eps file also found with the same name)
Fig. 25: TGC hits distribution in x-y plane for C side on run 91060(upper) and 91803(lower). Hit positions are calculated from coincidence of wire eta hits and strip phi hits. Only bottom sectors (sector 8~12) are used for triggerring (eps file also found with the same name)


Fig. 26: TGC trigger readout distribution (or latency) for TGC triggered events on run 91060. Three bunch crossing (BC) data, previous, current and next BC, are read out. More than 99% of events are in current BC. This means that we are reading the data in pipeline with correct latency. (This does not mean that trigger timing btw TGC and other subtrigger is aligned. ) Rest of less than 1% events are, we guess, due to cosmic showers. (eps file also found with the same name)
Fig. 27: Number of TGC hits per event for TGC stream (which contains RPC triggerred events. About 20% of events are RPC triggerred since RPC sector logic got crazy and sent the events to TGC stream...) on run 91060.. Both wire and strip hits in current BC are counted. Mean value of 53 hits is much smaller than number of channels 300 thousand events. This proves cleaness of TGC chambers. (eps file also found with the same name)
Fig. 28: removed (2009.05.21 : M.I)
Fig. 29: removed (2009.05.21 : M.I)
Fig. 30: Correlation btw MDT tube hits in middle station and TGC track interpolated to MDT middle station for A side on run 91060. TGC tracks are reconstructed with wire hits and required at least 3 station hits. Clear correlation is seen. Vertical lines are due to noisy MDT tube while horizontal lines are due to noisy TGC wires. (eps file also found with the same name)
Fig. 31: Correlation btw MDT tube hits in middle station and TGC track interpolated to MDT middle station for C side on run 91060. TGC tracks are reconstructed with wire hits and required at least 3 station hits. Clear correlation is seen. Vertical lines are due to noisy MDT tube while horizontal lines are due to noisy TGC wires. (eps file also found with the same name)
Fig. 32: The plot shows TGC layer efficiency as a function of applied High-Voltage. The event sample (= denominator of eff.) is selected based on the MDT track-segment and corresponding 3-wire hit channels for the case of TGC2 / TGC3 (2-wire hit channels for the case of TGC1) , and the efficiency of the last 4th (3rd) layer is evaluated.

Fig. 33: TGC Frontend readout timing (or latency) for TGC triggered events on run 91060. Three bunch crossing (BC) data, previous, current and next BC, are read out. More than 98% of events are in current BC. This means that we are reading the data in pipeline with correct latency. (This does not mean that readout timing btw TGC and other subtrigger is aligned. ) Rest of less than 1% events are, we guess, due to cosmic showers. (eps file also found with the same name)
Fig. 34: (a) TGC efficiency map for layer 5, T7 chamber. The horizontal axis is the strip channel and the vertical axis is the wire channel. (b) Efficiency projection to the strip channels. The blue bands show the strip channels which contains the wire support structure in its channel (dead region). Observed efficiency drops are consistent with the location of wire support location.
Fig. 35: TGC wire efficiency vs high voltage (for active region). Circle mark shows the combined run result in 2008, while square mark shows the beam test results in 2003. The difference of altitude (80m) is taken into account. Both results are consistent within 1%.
Fig. 36: The distributions of TGC wire efficiency for individual chamber at different high voltage values, 2650, 2750, 2800 and 2850V
Fig. 37: Muon trajectories triggered by the TGC with PT1(black), PT4(red) and PT5(blue). As the PT threshold becomes larger, directional characteristics for the interaction point become sharper.
Fig. 38: The distribution of the angle difference (Δθ) between the measured track segment of MDT EM and the infinite momentum line. Each color corresponds to the PT1(black), PT4(red) and PT5(blue) issued by TGC. As the PT threshold becomes larger, the distribution of Δθ get narrower
Fig. 39: TGC total trigger rate on 10th, September. Spike structure seems to be consistent with the 40s interval of the beam injection.
Fig. 40: TGC total trigger rate for the cosmic ray muons. 24 sectors are included. The trigger rate of PT1(black), PT4(red) and PT5(green) are shown.
Fig. 41: An rt-relation derrived from cosmic data.
Fig. 42: Resolution and systematic mean deviation of the t0-fit: From a large sample of cosmic data, a drift time spectrum with high statistics was filled. This was used as an probability desity to create random drift times. A large amount of spectra were filled using these hits, and t0-fits were performed. The width and mean of the distribution of the fitted t0 is shown vs the fit statistics.
Fig. 43: A residual distribution from cosmic data: Shown is the mean value and the width of the residual distribution.
Fig. 44a: A rt-relation from a run with toroid off was applied to a run with toroid on. The resulting residual distribution is shown.
Fig. 44b: A rt-relation from a run with toroid off was applied to a run with toroid on. Here a b-field correctino was applied ot the drift times. The resulting residual distribution is shown.
Fig. 45: Precision of the gas-monitor rt vs the assumed temperature for the temperature correction.
Fig. 46: Maximum drift times trends, measured by the Gas Monitor, of MDT Supply and Return gas lines from May-October 2009
Fig. 47: Means of Hit Residuals for 951 Chambers in Run 91060 using Gas Monitor Universal RT
Fig. 48: Hit Residuals (narrow sigma of double gaussian fit) for 951 Chambers in Run 91060 using Gas Monitor Universal RT
Fig. 49: Example of Hit Residuals with double gaussian fit for Chamber EIL4A05 in Run 91060
Fig. 50: Example of Hit Residuals vs signed drift radius for Chamber EIL4A05 in Run 91060
Fig. 51: Hit Residuals vs drift radius on Chamber BML2A05 (at 24.7 C) using Universal RT with and without Temperature correction.
Fig. 52: Theta at perigee for cosmic events (run 91060) and beam halo events (run 87863), without any cuts, reconstructed by Muonboy. Secondary peaks in Beam distribution are due to the projection of MBTS trigger stations. Distributions are normalized.

Fig. 53(a): Transverse momentum resolution evaluated with the top­ bottom method as a function of pT for large sectors as measured with the MOORE algorithm. The fitted curve is a phenomenological description of the stand-alone momentum resolution; it is the quadratic sum of an energy loss fluctuation term p0/pT, a multiple scattering term p1, and a spectrometer resolution term p2*pT.
 resolMooreLarge.
Fig. 53(b): Transverse momentum resolution evaluated with the top­ bottom method as a function of pT for small sectors as measured with the MOORE algorithm. The fitted curve is a phenomenological description of the stand-alone momentum resolution; it is the quadratic sum of an energy loss fluctuation term p0/pT, a multiple scattering term p1, and a spectrometer resolution term p2*pT.
Fig. 53(c): Transverse momentum resolution evaluated with the top­ bottom method as a function of pT for large sectors as measured with the Muonboy algorithm. The fitted curve is a phenomenological description of the stand-alone momentum resolution; it is the quadratic sum of an energy loss fluctuation term p0/pT, a multiple scattering term p1, and a spectrometer resolution term p2*pT.
Fig. 53(d): Transverse momentum resolution evaluated with the top­ bottom method as a function of pT for small sectors as measured with the Muonboy algorithm. The fitted curve is a phenomenological description of the stand-alone momentum resolution; it is the quadratic sum of an energy loss fluctuation term p0/pT, a multiple scattering term p1, and a spectrometer resolution term p2*pT.
Fig. 53(e): The same plot like 53(c), but for Monte-Carlo data.
 resolMooreLarge.
Fig. 53(f): The same plot like 53(d), but for Monte-Carlo data.
Fig. 54: MDT hit residuals for tubes excluded in the segment fit but expected to be crossed by the muon as a function of the distance of the track from the wire. Small residuals are associated with efficient hits. The triangular region is populated by early hits coming from delta-electrons. Missing hits are assigned to residuals equal to 15.5 mm.

Fig. 55: Tube efficiency as a function of the drift distance averaged over all tubes of the chamber BML2A03. Reported are the hardware efficiency, as well as tracking efficiencies for hit residuals smaller than 3, 5, 10 times the estimated residual standard deviation.

Fig. 56: MDT single-tube 5 sigma tracking efficiencies for the chamber BML2A07. The right plot shows an expanded view in the region where two disconnected tubes were found with tracking efficiency consistent with zero.

Fig. 57: MDT tube 5 sigma tracking efficiencies for for about 80 thousand barrel channels. About 0.2% of the channels are not functional and have an efficiency compatible with zero.

Fig. 58: TGC timing with Beam Halo events: The trigger delivered by the TGC system on Beam Halo events are correctly synchronized with the ATLAS trigger. In the plot it is shown the BCID (Bunch crossing identifier) which is the same as the one delivered by the ATLAS trigger.

Fig. 59: Relative difference in synchronization for all the TGC trigger channel. This measurement has been done using a Test Pulse Signal by which the latency of each single trigger channel has been measured. The relative synchronization of about 20K channels is at the level of 2.5 ns.

Fig. 60: Mean values of the apparent sagittas of straight muon tracks in the top sectors of the barrel muon spectrometer. The muon chambers at $\eta\approx0$ have $\eta$ index 1, the chambers at the out ends of the barrel at $\eta\approx1$ have $\eta$ index 6..
 barrel_align_acc.
Fig. 61: RPC cluster size for the horizontal sectors of the barrel muon spectrometer. A dependency on sector angular position with respect to the vertical cosmics is visible by comparison with the distribution in vertical sectors (see fig. 62). No runs with uniform HV at the nominal voltage of 9600 Volts was available, therefore a run taken at 9400 V was chosen.
 RPC_CS_Sector_Hor
Fig. 62: RPC cluster size for the vertical sectors of the barrel muon spectrometer. A dependency on sector angular position with respect to the vertical cosmics is visible by comparison with the distribution in horizontal sectors (see fig. 61). No runs with uniform HV at the nominal voltage of 9600 Volts was available, therefore a run taken at 9400 V was chosen.
 RPC_CS_Sector_Ver
Fig. 63: RPC cluster size as a function of HV for a single sector obtained with the RPC StandAlone algorithm, included in the ATLAS Muon Monitoring code. The data are cosmics taken with magnetic field on. The front-end discrimination threshold was set at the standard value of Vth =1000 mV.
RPC_CS_vs_HV
Fig. 64: RPC average cluster size as a function of the sector number. A dependency on sector angular position with respect to the vertical cosmics is clearly visible. For muons coming from the interaction point a flat behaviour is expected with a mean value close to the minimum of the present plot. Eta (Blue) and Phi (Red) panels are shown separately. Phi panels show a slightly higher cluster size than eta panels as expected from detector construction; an additional PET sheet is inserted in between the gas volume and the eta readout panel.
RPC_CS_vs_Sector_EtaPhiprof
Fig. 65: RPC detection efficiency as a function of HV for two readout panels (eta/phi) faced to the same gas volume. The efficiency is obtained using the RPC StandAlone tracking algorithm included in the ATLAS Muon Monitoring code. The data are cosmics taken with magnetic field on. The front-end discrimination threshold was set at the standard value of Vth =1000 mV.
RPC_singlePanelPlateauEff_EtaPhi
Fig. 66: RPC efficiency as a function of HV for a single gas volume, obtained with the RPC StandAlone tracking algorithm, included in the ATLAS Muon Monitoring code. The data are cosmics taken with magnetic field on. The front-end discrimination threshold was set at the standard value of Vth =1000 mV.
RPC_singlegapPlateauEff
Fig. 67: RPC pivot plane response for a splash event coming from ATLAS side A (right side of the plot).The black areas are due to the toroid legs in sector 12 and 14, to the toroid ribs along the even sectors and to the crack for the services at eta=0. The few white holes are due to detector regions not operated during the splash.
RPC_splash_b1
Fig. 68: RPC pivot plane response for a splash event coming from ATLAS side C (left side of the plot).The black areas are due to the toroid legs in sector 12 and 14, to the toroid ribs along the even sectors and to the crack for the services at eta=0. The few white holes are due to detector regions not operated during the splash.
RPC_splash_b2
Fig. 69: RPC number of gaps over charge threshold (set at about 100 hits/m^2) vs time. The instantaneous gap current is read at a sample rate of 1kHz via ADC boards (DCS standard) and if a programmed threshold is passed the charge peak is recorded by the DCS. Two group of events coming from beam splashes at the 2 sides of ATLAS are visible.
RPC-counts-per-gap-with-splashes
Fig. 70: RPC map for the charge released by a single splash event (from side A) on the detector gaps, expressed in terms of hits/m^2 (ADC threshold equivalent to ~400 hits/m^2). Eta and Phi coordinates are given in terms of Muon Station sector and position in eta. The fractional values are given by the gap position within the station. The three layers of chambers (Low_Pt, Pivot and High_Pt) at increasing distance from the beam axis are shown separately.
RPC-charge-splash-b2
Fig. 71: RPC cluster size distribution for two threshold values with chambers HV at 9000 V. It depends only slightly on threshold as expected. Each entry of the histogram is a read-out panel. The histograms are normalized to unit area. Higher threshold values correspond to effective looser threshold.
RPC-CS-9000V_2Vth
Fig. 72: RPC cluster size distribution for two high voltage values with front-end discriminator threshold at the nominal value of 1000 mV. The dependence on high voltage at a fixed threshold is as expected. Each entry of the histogram is a read-out panel. The histograms are normalized to unit area. Data from a 2009 cosmic run.
RPC-CS-2HV
Fig. 73: RPC spatial resolution for the eta panels of the BM chambers at the nominal HV of 9600 V. The spatial resolution is obtained with a Gaussian fit of the residual distribution for clusters of size 1 (blue) and 2 (red) and it is normalized to the strip pitch (~30 mm) of the corresponding read-out panel. A residual is defined as the position of the RPC cluster with respect to the track extrapolation on the RPC read-out panel. Each entry of the histogram is a read-out panel. The histograms are normalized to unit area
RPC-spatial-resolution-BM-eta
Fig. 74: RPC efficiency vs sector for BO read-out panels at 9600 V (red) and sector 4-5-6 at 9400 V (grey) with a mean hit time greater than 25 ns. The blue distribution is for BO read-out panels at 9600 V with a mean hit time less than 25 ns (hits out of the read-out window). Each entry of the histogram is a read-out panel with a front-end discrimination threshold at the nominal value of 1000 mV. Data are from a cosmic run taken in November 2009 with magnetic field on. No correction to high voltage for pressure and temperature is applied. Only read-out panels traversed at least by 100 muon tracks are considered.
RPC-BO-eff-vs-sector-time-cut
Fig. 75: RPC efficiency vs cluster size for BO chambers with HV=9600V and a threshold of 1000 mV. Each histogram entry is a read-out panel. Data from a cosmic run taken in November 2009 with magnetic field on. No correction to high voltage for pressure and temperature are applied. Only read-out panels traversed at least by 100 muon tracks are considered.
RPC-BO-eff-vs-CS
Fig. 76: RPC mean of residuals distribution for eta panel vs sector. Some sectors are missing due to low statistics (vertical sectors). It gives a feedback on the misalignment of RPC read-out panels with respect to MDT chambers up to fractions of mm (thanks to MDTs high tracking precision). Data from a cosmic run taken in November 2009 with magnetic field on.
RPC-eta-residual-vs-Sector
Fig. 77: RPC mean panel cluster size for BM chambers of all sectors at 9600 V and a threshold of 1000 mV. Event selection: 1 or 2 MDT muon tracks. Each entry of the histogram is a read-out panel. Data from a cosmic run taken in November 2009 with magnetic field on.
RPC-BM-cluster-size
Fig. 78: RPC mean panel cluster size for BM chambers of all sectors at 9600 V and a threshold of 1000 mV selecting only ETA read-out panels. Event selection: 1 or 2 MDT muon tracks. Each entry of the histogram is a read-out panel.Data from a cosmic run taken in November 2009 with magnetic field on.
RPC-cluster-size-for-BM-eta
Fig. 79: RPC mean panel cluster size for BM chambers of all sectors at 9600 V and a threshold of 1000 mV selecting only PHI read-out panels. Event selection: 1 or 2 MDT muon tracks. Each entry of the histogram is a read-out panel.Data from a cosmic run taken in November 2009 with magnetic field on.
RPC-cluster-size-BM-PHI
Fig. 80: RPC mean panel cluster size for BO chambers of all sectors at 9600 V and a threshold of 1000 mV. Event selection: 1 or 2 MDT muon tracks. Each entry of the histogram is a read-out panel.Data from a cosmic run taken in November 2009 with magnetic field on.
RPC-cluster-size-BO
Fig. 81: RPC mean panel cluster size for BO chambers of all sectors at 9600 V and a threshold of 1000 mV selecting only ETA read-out panels. Event selection: 1 or 2 MDT muon tracks. Each entry of the histogram is a read-out panel.Data from a cosmic run taken in November 2009 with magnetic field on.
RPC-cluster-size-BO-ETA
Fig. 82: RPC mean panel cluster size for BO chambers of all sectors at 9600 V and a threshold of 1000 mV selecting only PHI read-out panels. Event selection: 1 or 2 MDT muon tracks. Each entry of the histogram is a read-out panel.Data from a cosmic run taken in November 2009 with magnetic field on.
RPC-cluster-size-BO-PHI
Fig. 83(a): Sagitta resolution in the Large Barrel Sectors of the Muon Spectrometer as a function of muon momentum. Cosmic muons from special commissioning runs with toroid=OFF/solenoid=ON used (Fall 2009). Muon momentum is taken from Inner Detector measurements. Data is fitted by the function containing multiple scattering term K1 and intrinsic resolution term K0.
resolMooreLarge.
Fig. 83(b): Sagitta resolution in the Small Barrel Sectors of the Muon Spectrometer as a function of muon momentum. Cosmic muons from special commissioning runs with toroid=OFF/solenoid=ON used (Fall 2009). Muon momentum is taken from Inner Detector measurements. Data is fitted by the function containing multiple scattering term K1 and intrinsic resolution term K0.
 resolMooreLarge.
Fig. 84: Sagitta resolution in the Small Barrel Sectors of the Muon Spectrometer as a function of muon momentum. Cosmic muons from special commissioning runs with toroid=OFF/solenoid=ON used (Fall 2009). Muon momentum is taken from Inner Detector measurements. Data is fitted by the function containing multiple scattering term K1 and intrinsic resolution term K0.
 resolMooreLarge.
Fig. 85: Sagitta resolution in the Small Barrel Sectors of the Muon Spectrometer as a function of muon momentum. Cosmic muons from special commissioning runs with toroid=OFF/solenoid=ON used (Fall 2009). Muon momentum is taken from Inner Detector measurements. Data is fitted by the function containing multiple scattering term K1 and intrinsic resolution term K0.
 resolMooreLarge.
Fig. 86: Sagitta resolution in the Small Barrel Sectors of the Muon Spectrometer as a function of muon momentum. Cosmic muons from special commissioning runs with toroid=OFF/solenoid=ON used (Fall 2009). Muon momentum is taken from Inner Detector measurements. Data is fitted by the function containing multiple scattering term K1 and intrinsic resolution term K0.
 resolMooreLarge.
Fig. 87: Sagitta resolution in the Small Barrel Sectors of the Muon Spectrometer as a function of muon momentum. Cosmic muons from special commissioning runs with toroid=OFF/solenoid=ON used (Fall 2009). Muon momentum is taken from Inner Detector measurements. Data is fitted by the function containing multiple scattering term K1 and intrinsic resolution term K0.
 resolMooreLarge.
Fig. 88:Efficiency as a function of Eta for Stand alone tracks from Cosmics for the Moore reconstruction program .
 efficMoore.
Fig. 89: Efficiency as a function of Eta for Stand alone tracks from Cosmics for the Muonboy reconstruction program.
 efficMuonboy.
Fig. 90: Momentum resolution as a function of transverse momentum for the Barrel Small Chambers measured with Cosmics (red points) and with single muons from collisions (blue points).
 resolDataCosmicSmall.
Fig. 91: Endcap sagitta distribution from 2009 cosmics. Shown is the distribution for the two endcaps in the EI-EM-EO region, before (black-hashed) and after (yellow) applying optical alignment corrections. The black curve is a fit of a double-Gaussian distributions with four parameters; the mean values of the two single Gaussians are set to the same value, and they are normalized to the same area. The mean values are -15 +/- 19 mu for the sum of both endcaps (as shown on the plot), -28 +/- 22 mu for side A, and -11 +/- 38 mu for side C (both not shown here). The width of the distribution is dominated by multiple scattering, and indicates that the typical momentum of the cosmic muons in this plot is around 100 GeV.
 endcap_sagitta_2009_cosmics
Fig. 92: Mean values of sagitta distributions for individual sectors, plotted versus the sector number. To produce this plot, histograms like the one in Fig. 91 were created for each sector and fitted with a double-Gaussian function. The red-hashed sectors 16/01/02 and 08/09/10 are so poorly illuminated by cosmics that no meaningful results can be obtained. The straight black line is the "fit" of a 0-th order polynomial with its only free parameter fixed at zero; the chi2/ndf of the fit is thus a measure of how well the individual sector mean values are compatible with a common mean at zero. The errors of the mean values are statistical only, and they are significantly larger than the intrinsic accuracy of the optical alignment, in other words: this analysis is currently statistics-limited.
 endcap_sagittabysector_2009_cosmics

Links

Responsible: Muon System Project Leader
Last reviewed by: Never reviewed

Attachments Attachments
Topic attachments
I Attachment History Action Size Date Who Comment
Unknown file formateps ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig01a.eps r1 manage 19.4 K 2019-02-23 - 15:39 MasatoAoki  
PDFpdf ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig01a.pdf r1 manage 14.4 K 2019-02-23 - 15:39 MasatoAoki  
PNGpng ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig01a.png r1 manage 20.5 K 2019-02-23 - 15:39 MasatoAoki  
Unknown file formateps ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig01b.eps r1 manage 19.3 K 2019-02-23 - 15:39 MasatoAoki  
PDFpdf ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig01b.pdf r1 manage 14.3 K 2019-02-23 - 15:39 MasatoAoki  
PNGpng ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig01b.png r1 manage 20.9 K 2019-02-23 - 15:39 MasatoAoki  
Unknown file formateps ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig02a.eps r1 manage 26.6 K 2019-02-23 - 15:39 MasatoAoki  
PDFpdf ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig02a.pdf r1 manage 38.6 K 2019-02-23 - 15:39 MasatoAoki  
PNGpng ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig02a.png r1 manage 24.8 K 2019-02-23 - 15:39 MasatoAoki  
Unknown file formateps ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig02b.eps r1 manage 18.1 K 2019-02-23 - 15:39 MasatoAoki  
PDFpdf ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig02b.pdf r1 manage 37.8 K 2019-02-23 - 15:39 MasatoAoki  
PNGpng ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig02b.png r1 manage 24.9 K 2019-02-23 - 15:39 MasatoAoki  
Unknown file formateps ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig03a.eps r1 manage 19.2 K 2019-02-23 - 15:39 MasatoAoki  
PDFpdf ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig03a.pdf r1 manage 14.3 K 2019-02-23 - 15:39 MasatoAoki  
PNGpng ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig03a.png r1 manage 20.6 K 2019-02-23 - 15:39 MasatoAoki  
Unknown file formateps ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig03b.eps r1 manage 10.7 K 2019-02-23 - 15:39 MasatoAoki  
PDFpdf ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig03b.pdf r1 manage 12.0 K 2019-02-23 - 15:39 MasatoAoki  
PNGpng ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig03b.png r1 manage 19.4 K 2019-02-23 - 15:39 MasatoAoki  
Unknown file formateps ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig04a.eps r1 manage 22.2 K 2019-02-23 - 15:40 MasatoAoki  
PDFpdf ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig04a.pdf r1 manage 28.2 K 2019-02-23 - 15:40 MasatoAoki  
PNGpng ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig04a.png r1 manage 23.7 K 2019-02-23 - 15:40 MasatoAoki  
Unknown file formateps ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig04b.eps r1 manage 13.8 K 2019-02-23 - 15:40 MasatoAoki  
PDFpdf ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig04b.pdf r1 manage 26.6 K 2019-02-23 - 15:40 MasatoAoki  
PNGpng ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig04b.png r1 manage 24.5 K 2019-02-23 - 15:40 MasatoAoki  
Unknown file formateps ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig05a.eps r1 manage 19.0 K 2019-02-23 - 15:40 MasatoAoki  
PDFpdf ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig05a.pdf r1 manage 15.6 K 2019-02-23 - 15:40 MasatoAoki  
PNGpng ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig05a.png r1 manage 23.7 K 2019-02-23 - 15:40 MasatoAoki  
Unknown file formateps ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig05b.eps r1 manage 41.2 K 2019-02-23 - 15:41 MasatoAoki  
PDFpdf ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig05b.pdf r1 manage 19.5 K 2019-02-23 - 15:41 MasatoAoki  
PNGpng ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig05b.png r1 manage 18.8 K 2019-02-23 - 15:41 MasatoAoki  
Unknown file formateps ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig06.eps r1 manage 13.0 K 2019-02-23 - 15:41 MasatoAoki  
PDFpdf ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig06.pdf r1 manage 17.2 K 2019-02-23 - 15:41 MasatoAoki  
PNGpng ATL-COM-MUON-2019-007-fig06.png r1 manage 23.5 K 2019-02-23 - 15:41 MasatoAoki  
GIFgif BM_segment_efficiency.gif r2 r1 manage 9.7 K 2009-10-05 - 10:55 PeterKluit Segment efficiency for Barrel Middle chambers
GIFgif BO_segment_efficiency.gif r1 manage 14.0 K 2009-03-02 - 16:32 LudovicoPontecorvo  
PNGtiff Barrel_Alignment.tiff r1 manage 74.4 K 2009-03-02 - 10:45 LudovicoPontecorvo Barrel sagitta with tracks
GIFgif CosmicsVsBeam_theta.gif r1 manage 9.7 K 2009-11-03 - 13:48 UnknownUser Theta at perigee for cosmics and beam halo. Info here.
Unknown file formateps DataResolPtMSlargeMuonboy.eps r3 r2 r1 manage 12.7 K 2010-07-01 - 21:29 EveLeMenedeu MS resolution vs pt obtained by Muonboy on cosmics.
PNGpng DataResolPtMSlargeMuonboy.png r5 r4 r3 r2 r1 manage 15.0 K 2010-07-01 - 21:22 EveLeMenedeu  
Unknown file formateps DataResolPtMSsmallMuonboy.eps r3 r2 r1 manage 13.8 K 2010-07-01 - 20:15 EveLeMenedeu  
PNGpng DataResolPtMSsmallMuonboy.png r3 r2 r1 manage 15.0 K 2010-07-01 - 21:23 EveLeMenedeu  
GIFgif EM_segment_efficiency.gif r1 manage 10.2 K 2009-10-05 - 11:04 PeterKluit Segment Efficiency for Endcap Middle Chambers
Unknown file formateps EffiPerTube_BML2A07_5sigma_Preliminary.eps r1 manage 46.5 K 2009-12-01 - 01:41 MauroIodiceExternal MDT single-tube efficiencies
GIFgif EffiPerTube_BML2A07_5sigma_Preliminary.gif r1 manage 10.3 K 2009-12-01 - 01:42 MauroIodiceExternal MDT single-tube efficiencies
Unknown file formateps EffiResidVsRadius_BML2A07_5sigma_Preliminary.eps r1 manage 63.7 K 2009-12-01 - 01:12 MauroIodiceExternal Distribution of MDT hit residuals for tubes excluded in the segment fit but expected to be crossed by the muon as a function of the distance of the track from the wire. Small residuals are associated with efficient hits. The triangular region is populated by early hits coming from delta-electrons. Missing hits are assigned to residuals equal to 15.5 mm
GIFgif EffiResidVsRadius_BML2A07_5sigma_Preliminary.gif r1 manage 10.7 K 2009-12-01 - 01:23 MauroIodiceExternal  
Unknown file formateps EffiVsRadius_BML2A03_Prelim_Ave.eps r1 manage 8.8 K 2009-12-01 - 01:28 MauroIodiceExternal MDT Tube efficiency Vs Radius
GIFgif EffiVsRadius_BML2A03_Prelim_Ave.gif r1 manage 8.4 K 2009-12-01 - 01:29 MauroIodiceExternal  
PNGtiff EfficiencyvsEta-Cosmics.tiff r1 manage 1460.6 K 2010-09-24 - 11:55 LudovicoPontecorvo  
PNGtiff EfficiencyvsEta2.tiff r1 manage 2375.2 K 2010-09-24 - 11:55 LudovicoPontecorvo  
PNGtiff EfficiencyvsP-Cosmics-data.tiff r1 manage 1166.5 K 2010-09-24 - 11:54 LudovicoPontecorvo  
PNGpng Fraction_Of_Current_BC_Trigger.png r1 manage 13.7 K 2009-03-03 - 18:55 AkimasaIshikawa History of TGC Trigger Timing
PNGpng MDT_Eta_Vs_TGC_Track_Eta_3StationA.png r1 manage 55.0 K 2009-03-03 - 12:20 AkimasaIshikawa Correlation btw MDT middle station and TGC tracks
PNGpng MDT_Eta_Vs_TGC_Track_Eta_3StationC.png r1 manage 52.9 K 2009-03-03 - 12:20 AkimasaIshikawa Correlation btw MDT middle station and TGC tracks for C side
PNGtiff MDT_hit_residual_91060.tiff r1 manage 48.9 K 2009-03-02 - 11:08 LudovicoPontecorvo MDT hit residuals
Unknown file formateps MDTvsTGCCorrelationOfEtaPositionARun91060.eps r1 manage 45.1 K 2009-07-01 - 20:08 AkimasaIshikawa  
PNGpng MDTvsTGCCorrelationOfEtaPositionARun91060.png r1 manage 33.3 K 2009-07-01 - 20:08 AkimasaIshikawa  
Unknown file formateps MDTvsTGCCorrelationOfEtaPositionCRun91060.eps r1 manage 40.4 K 2009-07-01 - 20:08 AkimasaIshikawa  
PNGpng MDTvsTGCCorrelationOfEtaPositionCRun91060.png r1 manage 32.5 K 2009-07-01 - 20:08 AkimasaIshikawa  
Unknown file formateps MS_resol_cosmics.eps r1 manage 16.4 K 2010-03-05 - 10:12 OliverKortner  
PNGpng MS_resol_cosmics.png r1 manage 7.7 K 2010-03-05 - 10:11 OliverKortner  
PNGpng Moore_ChamberHitResMean_all.png r1 manage 39.9 K 2009-10-05 - 18:47 DanielLevin  
PNGpng Moore_ChamberHitResSig_all.png r1 manage 48.0 K 2009-10-05 - 18:48 DanielLevin  
PNGpng Number_Of_TGC_Hits_Per_Event.png r2 r1 manage 21.2 K 2009-03-04 - 16:30 AkimasaIshikawa  
GIFgif RPC-BM-cluster-size.gif r1 manage 9.1 K 2010-02-19 - 12:16 DavideBoscherini RPC cluster size for BM chambers
GIFgif RPC-BO-eff-vs-CS.gif r1 manage 8.7 K 2010-02-19 - 12:14 DavideBoscherini RPC efficiency vs cluster size for BO chambers
GIFgif RPC-BO-eff-vs-sector-time-cut.gif r1 manage 9.1 K 2010-02-19 - 12:13 DavideBoscherini RPC efficiency vs sector for BO chambers with time cut
GIFgif RPC-CS-2HV.gif r1 manage 10.5 K 2010-02-19 - 11:38 DavideBoscherini RPC cluster size for 2 HV values
GIFgif RPC-CS-9000V_2Vth.gif r1 manage 10.1 K 2010-02-19 - 11:26 DavideBoscherini RPC cluster size at 9kV for 2 Vth values
GIFgif RPC-MDT-correlation.gif r1 manage 16.0 K 2009-02-09 - 22:52 LudovicoPontecorvo  
PNGpng RPC-MDT-z-correlation-sector7bml.png r1 manage 19.7 K 2009-02-27 - 16:28 DavideBoscherini MDT versus RPC correlation of z coordinate
GIFgif RPC-charge-splash-b2.gif r1 manage 108.8 K 2010-02-12 - 10:49 DavideBoscherini RPC charge distribution via DCS for a splash event
GIFgif RPC-cluster-size-BM-PHI.gif r1 manage 8.9 K 2010-02-19 - 12:20 DavideBoscherini RPC cluster size for phi signals in BM chambers
GIFgif RPC-cluster-size-BO-ETA.gif r1 manage 9.1 K 2010-02-19 - 12:22 DavideBoscherini RPC cluster size for eta signals in BO chambers
GIFgif RPC-cluster-size-BO-PHI.gif r1 manage 9.4 K 2010-02-19 - 12:22 DavideBoscherini RPC cluster size for phi signals in BO chambers
GIFgif RPC-cluster-size-BO.gif r1 manage 9.1 K 2010-02-19 - 12:21 DavideBoscherini RPC cluster size for BO chambers
GIFgif RPC-cluster-size-for-BM-eta.gif r1 manage 9.7 K 2010-02-19 - 12:19 DavideBoscherini RPC cluster size for eta signals in BM chambers
PNGpng RPC-counts-per-gap-with-splashes.png r1 manage 62.5 K 2010-02-12 - 10:47 DavideBoscherini RPC gaps over threshold via DCS during beam splashes
GIFgif RPC-eta-residual-vs-Sector.gif r1 manage 8.0 K 2010-02-19 - 12:15 DavideBoscherini RPC eta residuals vs sector
GIFgif RPC-extrapolation.gif r1 manage 25.3 K 2009-02-09 - 22:52 LudovicoPontecorvo  
PNGpng RPC-lowpt-time-phi.png r1 manage 25.9 K 2009-02-27 - 15:16 DavideBoscherini RPC timing distribution of low pt phi trigger
PNGpng RPC-noise-rate.png r1 manage 26.0 K 2009-02-27 - 15:27 DavideBoscherini RPC single channel noise rate
PNGpng RPC-occupancy.png r1 manage 4.9 K 2009-03-16 - 14:17 DavideBoscherini RPC occupancy for random and cosmic triggers
GIFgif RPC-spatial-resolution-BM-eta.gif r1 manage 11.0 K 2010-02-19 - 12:10 DavideBoscherini RPC spatial resolution for BM eta
PNGpng RPC-tracks-on-surface.png r1 manage 21.2 K 2009-02-27 - 14:56 DavideBoscherini Impact point at ground level of RPC reconstructed tracks
GIFgif RPC-trigger-occupancy-Sep2009.gif r1 manage 91.2 K 2009-10-06 - 11:37 DavideBoscherini RPC LowPt trigger occupancy in September 2009
PNGpng RPC-trigger-road.png r1 manage 5.2 K 2009-03-16 - 14:32 DavideBoscherini RPC trigger roads in phi view
GIFgif RPC_CS_Sector_Hor.gif r1 manage 10.0 K 2010-02-11 - 11:19 DavideBoscherini RPC cluster size for horizontal sectors
GIFgif RPC_CS_Sector_Ver.gif r1 manage 9.7 K 2010-02-11 - 11:20 DavideBoscherini RPC cluster size for vertical sectors
GIFgif RPC_CS_vs_HV.gif r1 manage 6.0 K 2010-02-11 - 11:22 DavideBoscherini RPC cluster size vs HV
GIFgif RPC_CS_vs_Sector_EtaPhiprof.gif r1 manage 9.1 K 2010-02-11 - 11:38 DavideBoscherini RPC cluster size vs sector number
GIFgif RPC_singlePanelPlateauEff_EtaPhi.gif r1 manage 12.7 K 2010-02-11 - 11:39 DavideBoscherini RPC single gap efficiency vs HV for eta and phi panels of the same gas volume
GIFgif RPC_singlegapPlateauEff.gif r1 manage 7.7 K 2010-02-11 - 11:38 DavideBoscherini RPC single gap efficiency vs HV
GIFgif RPC_splash_b1.gif r1 manage 29.8 K 2010-02-11 - 11:41 DavideBoscherini RPC coverage with splash event from beam 1
GIFgif RPC_splash_b2.gif r1 manage 27.9 K 2010-02-11 - 11:41 DavideBoscherini RPC coverage with splash event from beam 2
PNGpng RPC_trigger_occupancy_January_2009.png r1 manage 294.7 K 2009-03-17 - 10:24 DavideBoscherini RPC trigger coverage in January 2009
PNGtiff RPC_trigger_occupancy_January_2009.tiff r1 manage 302.1 K 2009-03-02 - 11:21 LudovicoPontecorvo  
PNGpng Resids_wwo_temperatureCorrection.png r1 manage 113.4 K 2009-10-05 - 19:23 DanielLevin  
Unknown file formateps Run_121737_TubeEffi_AllBarrel_Preliminary.eps r1 manage 9.1 K 2009-12-01 - 01:49 MauroIodiceExternal MDT single-tube efficiencies for about 80k tubes in the barrel
GIFgif Run_121737_TubeEffi_AllBarrel_Preliminary.gif r1 manage 10.6 K 2009-12-01 - 01:51 MauroIodiceExternal MDT single-tube efficiencies for about 80k tubes in the Barrel
GIFgif Run_91060_GlobalOccupancy.gif r1 manage 38.2 K 2009-02-09 - 21:09 LudovicoPontecorvo  
GIFgif Run_91060_residDoubleGaus_sideA.gif r1 manage 42.2 K 2009-02-09 - 21:10 LudovicoPontecorvo  
GIFgif Run_91060_residGraph_sideA.gif r1 manage 6.3 K 2009-02-09 - 21:10 LudovicoPontecorvo  
GIFgif Run_91060_tubeEffi_BMLA07.gif r1 manage 24.9 K 2009-02-09 - 21:11 LudovicoPontecorvo  
PNGpng SL_Timing.png r2 r1 manage 14.9 K 2009-03-04 - 16:30 AkimasaIshikawa  
Unknown file formateps SimuResolPtMSlargeMuonboy.eps r2 r1 manage 13.1 K 2010-07-01 - 20:04 EveLeMenedeu  
PNGpng SimuResolPtMSlargeMuonboy.png r3 r2 r1 manage 14.8 K 2010-07-01 - 20:05 EveLeMenedeu  
Unknown file formateps SimuResolPtMSsmallMuonboy.eps r2 r1 manage 13.9 K 2010-07-01 - 20:06 EveLeMenedeu  
PNGpng SimuResolPtMSsmallMuonboy.png r2 r1 manage 14.3 K 2010-07-01 - 20:07 EveLeMenedeu  
PNGpng Strip_Efficiency.png r3 r2 r1 manage 13.2 K 2009-03-04 - 16:28 AkimasaIshikawa  
Unknown file formateps TGC1.eps r1 manage 207.9 K 2009-09-24 - 20:47 YutaTakahashi  
GIFgif TGC1.gif r1 manage 36.5 K 2009-09-24 - 20:58 YutaTakahashi  
Unknown file formateps TGC2.eps r1 manage 9.6 K 2009-09-24 - 20:48 YutaTakahashi  
GIFgif TGC2.gif r1 manage 14.5 K 2009-09-24 - 21:02 YutaTakahashi  
Unknown file formateps TGC3.eps r1 manage 29.3 K 2009-09-24 - 20:48 YutaTakahashi  
GIFgif TGC3.gif r1 manage 16.1 K 2009-09-24 - 21:02 YutaTakahashi  
Unknown file formateps TGC4.eps r1 manage 31.2 K 2009-09-24 - 20:49 YutaTakahashi  
GIFgif TGC4.gif r1 manage 76.8 K 2009-09-24 - 21:02 YutaTakahashi  
Unknown file formateps TGC5.eps r1 manage 14.6 K 2009-09-24 - 20:49 YutaTakahashi  
GIFgif TGC5.gif r1 manage 12.6 K 2009-09-24 - 21:02 YutaTakahashi  
GIFgif TGC6.gif r1 manage 32.0 K 2009-09-24 - 20:49 YutaTakahashi  
PNGpng TGC7.png r1 manage 158.0 K 2009-09-24 - 20:49 YutaTakahashi  
Unknown file formateps TGCDetectorCoverageARun91060.eps r2 r1 manage 259.8 K 2010-05-01 - 14:47 AkimasaIshikawa  
PNGpng TGCDetectorCoverageARun91060.png r2 r1 manage 16.8 K 2010-05-01 - 14:48 AkimasaIshikawa  
Unknown file formateps TGCDetectorCoverageCRun91060.eps r2 r1 manage 247.9 K 2010-05-01 - 14:41 AkimasaIshikawa  
PNGpng TGCDetectorCoverageCRun91060.png r2 r1 manage 14.6 K 2010-05-01 - 14:39 AkimasaIshikawa  
Unknown file formateps TGCDetectorCoverageCRun91803.eps r2 r1 manage 295.9 K 2010-05-01 - 14:42 AkimasaIshikawa  
PNGpng TGCDetectorCoverageCRun91803.png r2 r1 manage 18.6 K 2010-05-01 - 14:39 AkimasaIshikawa  
Unknown file formateps TGCFrontEndReadoutTimingRun91060.eps r2 r1 manage 5.5 K 2009-07-01 - 21:12 AkimasaIshikawa  
PNGpng TGCFrontEndReadoutTimingRun91060.png r2 r1 manage 15.4 K 2009-07-01 - 21:12 AkimasaIshikawa  
Unknown file formateps TGCNumberOfHitsPerEventsRun91060.eps r1 manage 10.6 K 2009-07-01 - 20:51 AkimasaIshikawa  
PNGpng TGCNumberOfHitsPerEventsRun91060.png r1 manage 27.3 K 2009-07-01 - 20:51 AkimasaIshikawa  
PNGpng TGCRelativeTiming.png r1 manage 62.7 K 2009-12-12 - 14:08 LudovicoPontecorvo  
Unknown file formateps TGCTriggerTimingRun91060.eps r2 r1 manage 5.6 K 2009-07-01 - 21:12 AkimasaIshikawa  
PNGpng TGCTriggerTimingRun91060.png r2 r1 manage 15.1 K 2009-07-01 - 21:12 AkimasaIshikawa  
PNGtiff TGC_efficiency_91060.tiff r1 manage 303.7 K 2009-03-02 - 11:26 LudovicoPontecorvo  
PNGpng TGCtimingHalo.png r1 manage 51.4 K 2009-12-12 - 14:09 LudovicoPontecorvo  
PNGpng Wire_Efficiency.png r3 r2 r1 manage 13.0 K 2009-03-04 - 16:28 AkimasaIshikawa  
PNGpng Wire_Efficiency_History.png r1 manage 15.8 K 2009-03-03 - 18:54 AkimasaIshikawa History of TGC Wire Efficiency
PNGpng XY_View_A.png r1 manage 20.8 K 2009-03-03 - 12:16 AkimasaIshikawa TGC hits in x-y plane for A side
PNGpng XY_View_C.png r1 manage 18.1 K 2009-03-03 - 12:16 AkimasaIshikawa TGC hits in x-y plane for C side
PNGpng XY_View_C_91803.png r1 manage 22.9 K 2009-03-09 - 14:13 AkimasaIshikawa TGC hits in x-y plane for C side for run 91803. All sectors were used for triggering
PDFpdf barrel_align_acc.pdf r1 manage 56.6 K 2010-01-07 - 10:32 OliverKortner  
PNGpng barrel_align_acc.png r1 manage 59.7 K 2010-01-07 - 10:32 OliverKortner  
PDFpdf direction-public.pdf r4 r3 r2 r1 manage 17.4 K 2009-04-16 - 18:41 LudovicoPontecorvo  
PNGpng eff_vs_eta.png r1 manage 47.8 K 2008-11-21 - 08:47 OliverKortner  
PNGpng eff_vs_pt.png r1 manage 33.4 K 2008-11-21 - 08:48 OliverKortner  
Unknown file formateps endcap_sagitta_2009_cosmics.eps r1 manage 30.6 K 2011-03-16 - 17:00 ChristophAmelung endcap_sagitta_2009_cosmics.eps
PNGpng endcap_sagitta_2009_cosmics.png r1 manage 97.9 K 2011-03-16 - 17:05 ChristophAmelung endcap_sagitta_2009_cosmics
Unknown file formateps endcap_sagittabysector_2009_cosmics.eps r1 manage 36.0 K 2011-03-16 - 17:38 ChristophAmelung endcap_sagittabysector_2009_cosmics
PNGpng endcap_sagittabysector_2009_cosmics.png r1 manage 172.4 K 2011-03-16 - 17:39 ChristophAmelung endcap_sagittabysector_2009_cosmics
Unknown file formateps fig32.TGC-HV_scan.eps r1 manage 9.6 K 2009-05-21 - 00:15 MasayaIshino Fig.32 (eps) TGC efficiency - HV scan
GIFgif fig32.TGC-HV_scan.gif r1 manage 10.1 K 2009-05-21 - 00:14 MasayaIshino Fig.32 (gif) TGC efficiency - HV scan
Unknown file formateps gasmon_rt_an.eps r1 manage 6687.9 K 2009-10-01 - 11:06 FelixRauscher  
PNGpng gasmon_rt_an.png r1 manage 90.2 K 2009-10-01 - 11:07 FelixRauscher  
PNGpng hitresids_EIL4A05.png r1 manage 109.4 K 2009-10-05 - 19:14 DanielLevin  
PNGpng hitresids_vs_radius_EIL4A05.png r1 manage 165.0 K 2009-10-05 - 19:02 DanielLevin  
Unknown file formateps mdtresiMCMoore.eps r1 manage 11.9 K 2010-06-01 - 19:26 LudovicoPontecorvo  
PNGpng mdtresiMCMoore.png r1 manage 66.7 K 2010-06-01 - 19:22 LudovicoPontecorvo  
Unknown file formateps mdttrackhitsMCMoore.eps r1 manage 9.0 K 2010-06-01 - 19:26 LudovicoPontecorvo  
PNGpng mdttrackhitsMCMoore.png r1 manage 64.2 K 2010-06-01 - 19:22 LudovicoPontecorvo  
Unknown file formateps momentumMCefficiencyMoore.eps r1 manage 9.4 K 2010-06-01 - 19:27 LudovicoPontecorvo  
PNGpng momentumMCefficiencyMoore.png r1 manage 68.0 K 2010-06-01 - 19:23 LudovicoPontecorvo  
Unknown file formateps res_b_corr.eps r1 manage 140.5 K 2009-10-01 - 11:04 FelixRauscher  
PNGpng res_b_corr.png r1 manage 27.4 K 2009-10-01 - 11:04 FelixRauscher  
Unknown file formateps res_no_corr.eps r1 manage 139.9 K 2009-10-01 - 11:01 FelixRauscher  
PNGpng res_no_corr.png r1 manage 27.5 K 2009-10-01 - 11:00 FelixRauscher residual distribution wo b-field correction
PNGpng res_vs_eta.png r1 manage 29.4 K 2008-11-21 - 08:29 OliverKortner  
PNGpng res_vs_phi.png r1 manage 38.1 K 2008-11-21 - 08:33 OliverKortner  
PNGpng res_vs_pt_barrel.png r1 manage 22.5 K 2008-11-21 - 08:35 OliverKortner  
PNGpng res_vs_pt_endcap.png r1 manage 22.4 K 2008-11-21 - 08:46 OliverKortner  
Unknown file formateps residual_an.eps r1 manage 19.1 K 2009-10-01 - 10:56 FelixRauscher Residual distribution
PNGpng residual_an.png r1 manage 28.6 K 2009-10-01 - 10:57 FelixRauscher residual distribution
Unknown file formateps resolMooreLarge.eps r1 manage 16.4 K 2010-03-11 - 14:45 OliverKortner  
PNGpng resolMooreLarge.png r1 manage 69.5 K 2010-03-11 - 14:45 OliverKortner  
Unknown file formateps resolMooreSmall.eps r1 manage 17.6 K 2010-03-11 - 14:46 OliverKortner  
PNGpng resolMooreSmall.png r1 manage 71.4 K 2010-03-11 - 14:47 OliverKortner  
Unknown file formateps rt.eps r1 manage 10.9 K 2009-10-01 - 10:41 FelixRauscher A typical rt relation (eps)
PNGpng rt.png r1 manage 20.9 K 2009-10-01 - 10:41 FelixRauscher A typical rt ralation (png)
Unknown file formateps sag_BML2C05.eps r1 manage 13.7 K 2010-06-01 - 19:27 LudovicoPontecorvo  
PNGpng sag_BML2C05.png r1 manage 94.4 K 2010-06-01 - 19:23 LudovicoPontecorvo  
Unknown file formateps sag_grph_L_data_new.eps r1 manage 31.9 K 2010-05-27 - 13:24 IgorPotrap track sagitta resolution (large barrel sectors)
PNGpng sag_grph_L_data_new.png r1 manage 24.3 K 2010-05-27 - 13:24 IgorPotrap  
Unknown file formateps sag_grph_S_data_new.eps r1 manage 33.0 K 2010-05-27 - 13:26 IgorPotrap track sagitta resolution (small barrel sectors)
PNGpng sag_grph_S_data_new.png r1 manage 25.0 K 2010-05-27 - 13:26 IgorPotrap  
PDFpdf sagitta-public.pdf r3 r2 r1 manage 16.9 K 2009-04-16 - 18:40 LudovicoPontecorvo  
GIFgif segmentefficieny.gif r1 manage 9.6 K 2009-10-05 - 10:53 PeterKluit Segment efficiency per MDT chamber for cosmics
Unknown file formateps t0_mean_res_vs_stat_alt.eps r1 manage 10.0 K 2009-10-01 - 10:46 FelixRauscher Resolution and systematic offset of the t0-fit
PNGpng t0_mean_res_vs_stat_alt.png r1 manage 27.1 K 2009-10-01 - 10:47 FelixRauscher Resolution and systematic offset of the t0-fit
Unknown file formateps trk_resid_BML2C03_new.eps r3 r2 r1 manage 31.2 K 2009-03-18 - 16:14 IgorPotrap sagitta in the barrel before and after alignment (also with tracks)
PNGpng trk_resid_BML2C03_new.png r3 r2 r1 manage 36.1 K 2009-03-18 - 16:14 IgorPotrap  
Edit | Attach | Watch | Print version | History: r81 < r80 < r79 < r78 < r77 | Backlinks | Raw View | WYSIWYG | More topic actions
Topic revision: r81 - 2023-03-07 - PhilippFleischmann
 
    • Cern Search Icon Cern Search
    • TWiki Search Icon TWiki Search
    • Google Search Icon Google Search

    Atlas All webs login

This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright &© 2008-2023 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
or Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? use Discourse or Send feedback