AtlasPublicTopicHeader.png

ApprovedPlotsTileCalibrationCombined

Introduction

This page lists the public plots produced within the Tile Calorimeter calibration group. The combination of several TileCal calibration systems is shown.

Approved Tile Calorimeter Calibration Plots - Combined


The relative light yield I/I0 of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the A13 cell as a function of the deposited dose during the LHC Run 2. The ratio I/I0, interpreted as the light loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, is derived from the difference in the response to the Cesium system ($\Delta$Cs) and Laser pulses ($\Delta$Cs) and defined as I/I0=1+($\Delta$Cs-$\Delta$Las)/100%. Cesium (Cs) and Laser data cover the 2015-18 period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the same period. The difference $\Delta$Las is measured with respect to a set of reference Laser runs taken around the first Cs scan from each collision year. No I/I0 variation is assumed between collision years. Vertical error bars correspond to the RMS over the cell measurements. The yellow band constitutes the systematic uncertainties on I/I0 and the RMS of the simulated dose distribution within cell volume. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. Black vertical lines represent the expected dose by the end of Run 3 (350 fb-1) and HL-LHC (4000 fb-1). Square markers are data from bare scintillators irradiated with gammas (Cs-137 source) and secondary hadrons from proton beam in Aluminium target (ATL-TILECAL-PUB-2007-010), and the open triangle is a measurement from scintillator and fibre irradiation with gammas (Co-60) (CERN/LHCC 96-42).

Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Beatriz Pereira beatriz.catarina.pinheiro.pereira@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 16 November 2020

LightLoss_doseGEANT4run2_scintOnly_A13_2015201620172018_log_Cs.png
[eps] [pdf]

The relative light yield I/I0 of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the A1 cell as a function of the deposited dose during the LHC Run 2. The ratio I/I0, interpreted as the light loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, is derived from the difference in the response to the Cesium system ($\Delta$Cs) and Laser pulses ($\Delta$Cs) and defined as I/I0=1+($\Delta$Cs-$\Delta$Las)/100%. Cesium (Cs) and Laser data cover the 2015-18 period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the same period. The difference $\Delta$Las is measured with respect to a set of reference Laser runs taken around the first Cs scan from each collision year. No I/I0 variation is assumed between collision years. Vertical error bars correspond to the RMS over the cell measurements. The yellow band constitutes the systematic uncertainties on I/I0 and the RMS of the simulated dose distribution within cell volume. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. The black solid lines indicate the exponential fit to the data I/I0=ep0- dose/p1, with the dashed black lines corresponding to the exponential fit to the up and down systematic error variations. The nominal fit parameters are presented in the figure.

Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Beatriz Pereira beatriz.catarina.pinheiro.pereira@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 16 November 2020

LightLoss_doseGEANT4run2_scintOnly_A1_2015201620172018_fit_expo_Cs.png
[eps] [pdf]

The relative light yield I/I0 of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the A12 cell as a function of the deposited dose during the LHC Run 2. The ratio I/I0, interpreted as the light loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, is derived from the difference in the response to the Cesium system ($\Delta$Cs) and Laser pulses ($\Delta$Cs) and defined as I/I0=1+($\Delta$Cs-$\Delta$Las)/100%. Cesium (Cs) and Laser data cover the 2015-18 period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the same period. The difference $\Delta$Las is measured with respect to a set of reference Laser runs taken around the first Cs scan from each collision year. No I/I0 variation is assumed between collision years. Vertical error bars correspond to the RMS over the cell measurements. The yellow band constitutes the systematic uncertainties on I/I0 and the RMS of the simulated dose distribution within cell volume. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. The black solid lines indicate the exponential fit to the data I/I0=ep0- dose/p1, with the dashed black lines corresponding to the exponential fit to the up and down systematic error variations. The nominal fit parameters are presented in the figure.

Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Beatriz Pereira beatriz.catarina.pinheiro.pereira@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 16 November 2020

LightLoss_doseGEANT4run2_scintOnly_A12_2015201620172018_fit_expo_Cs.png
[eps] [pdf]

The relative light yield I/I0 of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the A13 cell as a function of the deposited dose during the LHC Run 2. The ratio I/I0, interpreted as the light loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, is derived from the difference in the response to the Cesium system ($\Delta$Cs) and Laser pulses ($\Delta$Cs) and defined as I/I0=1+($\Delta$Cs-$\Delta$Las)/100%. Cesium (Cs) and Laser data cover the 2015-18 period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the same period. The difference $\Delta$Las is measured with respect to a set of reference Laser runs taken around the first Cs scan from each collision year. No I/I0 variation is assumed between collision years. Vertical error bars correspond to the RMS over the cell measurements. The yellow band constitutes the systematic uncertainties on I/I0 and the RMS of the simulated dose distribution within cell volume. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. The black solid lines indicate the exponential fit to the data I/I0=ep0- dose/p1, with the dashed black lines corresponding to the exponential fit to the up and down systematic error variations. The nominal fit parameters are presented in the figure.

Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Beatriz Pereira beatriz.catarina.pinheiro.pereira@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 16 November 2020

LightLoss_doseGEANT4run2_scintOnly_A13_2015201620172018_fit_expo_Cs.png
[eps] [pdf]

The relative light yield I/I0 of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the A16 cell as a function of the deposited dose during the LHC Run 2. The ratio I/I0, interpreted as the light loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, is derived from the difference in the response to the Cesium system ($\Delta$Cs) and Laser pulses ($\Delta$Cs) and defined as I/I0=1+($\Delta$Cs-$\Delta$Las)/100%. Cesium (Cs) and Laser data cover the 2015-18 period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the same period. The difference $\Delta$Las is measured with respect to a set of reference Laser runs taken around the first Cs scan from each collision year. No I/I0 variation is assumed between collision years. Vertical error bars correspond to the RMS over the cell measurements. The yellow band constitutes the systematic uncertainties on I/I0 and the RMS of the simulated dose distribution within cell volume. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. The black solid lines indicate the exponential fit to the data I/I0=ep0- dose/p1, with the dashed black lines corresponding to the exponential fit to the up and down systematic error variations. The nominal fit parameters are presented in the figure.

Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Beatriz Pereira beatriz.catarina.pinheiro.pereira@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 16 November 2020

LightLoss_doseGEANT4run2_scintOnly_A16_2015201620172018_fit_expo_Cs.png
[eps] [pdf]

The relative light yield I/I0 of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the B11 cell as a function of the deposited dose during the LHC Run 2. The ratio I/I0, interpreted as the light loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, is derived from the difference in the response to the Cesium system ($\Delta$Cs) and Laser pulses ($\Delta$Cs) and defined as I/I0=1+($\Delta$Cs-$\Delta$Las)/100%. Cesium (Cs) and Laser data cover the 2015-18 period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the same period. The difference $\Delta$Las is measured with respect to a set of reference Laser runs taken around the first Cs scan from each collision year. No I/I0 variation is assumed between collision years. Vertical error bars correspond to the RMS over the cell measurements. The yellow band constitutes the systematic uncertainties on I/I0 and the RMS of the simulated dose distribution within cell volume. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. The black solid lines indicate the exponential fit to the data I/I0=ep0- dose/p1, with the dashed black lines corresponding to the exponential fit to the up and down systematic error variations. The nominal fit parameters are presented in the figure.

Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Beatriz Pereira beatriz.catarina.pinheiro.pereira@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 16 November 2020

LightLoss_doseGEANT4run2_scintOnly_B11_2015201620172018_fit_expo_Cs.png
[eps] [pdf]

The relative light yield I/I0 of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the C10 cell as a function of the deposited dose during the LHC Run 2. The ratio I/I0, interpreted as the light loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, is derived from the difference in the response to the Cesium system ($\Delta$Cs) and Laser pulses ($\Delta$Cs) and defined as I/I0=1+($\Delta$Cs-$\Delta$Las)/100%. Cesium (Cs) and Laser data cover the 2015-18 period, removing the special C10 cells (modules 39 to 42 and 55 to 58). The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the same period. The difference $\Delta$Las is measured with respect to a set of reference Laser runs taken around the first Cs scan from each collision year. No I/I0 variation is assumed between collision years. Vertical error bars correspond to the RMS over the cell measurements. The yellow band constitutes the systematic uncertainties on I/I0 and the RMS of the simulated dose distribution within cell volume. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. The black solid lines indicate the exponential fit to the data I/I0=ep0- dose/p1, with the dashed black lines corresponding to the exponential fit to the up and down systematic error variations. The nominal fit parameters are presented in the figure.

Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Beatriz Pereira beatriz.catarina.pinheiro.pereira@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 16 November 2020

LightLoss_doseGEANT4run2_scintOnly_C10_2015201620172018_fit_expo_Cs.png
[eps] [pdf]

The relative light yield I/I0 of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the D4 cell as a function of the deposited dose during the LHC Run 2. The ratio I/I0, interpreted as the light loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, is derived from the difference in the response to the Cesium system ($\Delta$Cs) and Laser pulses ($\Delta$Cs) and defined as I/I0=1+($\Delta$Cs-$\Delta$Las)/100%. Cesium (Cs) and Laser data cover the 2015-18 period, removing the special small-sized D4 cells (modules 14, 15, 18 and 19) and neighbouring cells (modules 13, 16, 17 and 20) due to irregular shielding from smaller D4 cells. The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the same period. The difference $\Delta$Las is measured with respect to a set of reference Laser runs taken around the first Cs scan from each collision year. No I/I0 variation is assumed between collision years. Vertical error bars correspond to the RMS over the cell measurements. The yellow band constitutes the systematic uncertainties on I/I0 and the RMS of the simulated dose distribution within cell volume. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. The black solid lines indicate the exponential fit to the data I/I0=ep0- dose/p1, with the dashed black lines corresponding to the exponential fit to the up and down systematic error variations. The nominal fit parameters are presented in the figure.

Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Beatriz Pereira beatriz.catarina.pinheiro.pereira@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 16 November 2020

LightLoss_doseGEANT4run2_scintOnly_D4_2015201620172018_fit_expo_Cs.png
[eps] [pdf]

Measured relative light yield I/I0 of the ATLAS Tile calorimeter cells in the of the Run 2. I/I0, interpreted as the light loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, is derived from the difference in the response to the Cesium system ($\Delta$Cs) and defined as I/I0=1+($\Delta$Cs-$\Delta$Las)/100%. The innermost layer A is more exposed to radiation and therefore suffers more from light yield degradation. The relative uncertainty $\Delta$(I/I0)/(I/I0)100% is of the order of 1%. Measurement in the D layer and most of the BC layers are not yet sensitive to a light yield degradation.

Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Beatriz Pereira beatriz.catarina.pinheiro.pereira@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 5 October 2020

Map_Light_Yield_value_R2_doseGEANT4run2_scintOnly_Cs.png
[png] [pdf] [eps]

Expected relative light yield I/I0 of the ATLAS Tile calorimeter cells in the of the Run 3 (350 fb-1,). I/I0, interpreted as the light loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, is derived from the difference in the response to the Cesium system ($\Delta$Cs) and defined as I/I0=1+($\Delta$Cs-$\Delta$Las)/100%. The expected I/I0 results from the extrapolation of an exponential fit of I/I0 as a function of the simulated dose using 2015-18 data. The innermost layer A is more exposed to radiation and therefore suffers more from light yield degradation. The relative uncertainty $\Delta$(I/I0)/(I/I0)100% on the extrapolation takes into account the systematic uncertainties of the current measurement. It ranges from 8 to 16% for the cells in the A layer, in the Extended Barrel B layer, and the C10 cell, and is around 5% for the remaining cells.

Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Beatriz Pereira beatriz.catarina.pinheiro.pereira@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 16 November 2020

Map_Light_Yield_value_R3_doseGEANT4run2_scintOnly_Cs.png
[png] [pdf] [eps]

Gain variation seen by the laser and the cesium systems in % for the all channels in the period between June 11th, 2015 to July 17th 2015. The LHC delivered luminosity during this period corresponds to 97.9 pb-1. PMTs with bad quality status, problematic high voltage or flagged as affected by any calibration system have been excluded.

Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 25 September 2018

y2015_iovI_CsLas_COLZ.png
[eps] [pdf] [png]

Scatter plot showing the gain variation seen by the laser and the cesium systems in % as for channels in layers A, BC and D in the period between June 11th, 2015 to July 17th 2015. The LHC delivered luminosity during this period corresponds to 97.9 pb-1. PMTs with bad quality status, problematic high voltage or flagged as affected by any calibration system have been excluded. Layer A is closer to the collision point, thus it displays larger drifts.

Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 25 September 2018

y2015_iovI_CsLas_SCAT.png
[eps] [pdf] [png]

Ratio of laser calibration constants over cesium calibration constants for channels in Layer A, BC and D in the long barrel. The calibration constant is defined as f = 1/(1+$\Delta$drift), where $\Delta$drift is the drift observed between June 11th, 2015 to July 17th 2015. The LHC delivered luminosity during this period corresponds to 97.9 pb-1. A Gaussian function is fitted to distribution of the ratio fLas/fCs corresponding to each longitudinal layer. The fitted parameters are shown on the plot. PMTs with bad quality status, problematic high voltage or flagged as affected by any calibration system have been excluded. The fitted mean, ‘bias’, is used to assess the agreement between the laser and Cesium measurements. Any deviations from 1.0 can be interpreted as a bias in the laser measurement or scintillator ageing effect (seen by Cesium but not laser). The width is correlated to the laser measurement precision (assuming no uncertainty from Cesium measurement).

Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 25 September 2018

y2015_iovI_CsLas_Ratio_LB.png
[eps] [pdf] [png]

Ratio of laser calibration constants over cesium calibration constants for channels in Layer A, BC and D in the extended barrel. The calibration constant is defined as f = 1/(1+$\Delta$drift), where $\Delta$drift is the drift observed between June 11th, 2015 to July 17th 2015. The LHC delivered luminosity during this period corresponds to 97.9 pb-1. A Gaussian function is fitted to distribution of the ratio fLas/fCs corresponding to each longitudinal layer. PMTs with bad quality status, problematic high voltage or flagged as affected by any calibration system have been excluded. The fitted mean, ‘bias’, is used to assess the agreement between the laser and Cesium measurements. Any deviations from 1.0 can be interpreted as a bias in the laser measurement or scintillator ageing effect (seen by Cesium but not laser). The width is correlated to the laser measurement precision (assuming no uncertainty from Cesium measurement).

Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 25 September 2018

y2015_iovI_CsLas_Ratio_EB.png
[eps] [pdf] [png]

Gain variation seen by the laser and the cesium systems in % as for the all channels in the period between July 17th 2015 to November 3rd. The LHC delivered luminosity during this period corresponds to 3.9 fb-1. PMTs with bad quality status, problematic high voltage or flagged as affected by any calibration system have been excluded.

Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 25 September 2018

y2015_iovII_CsLas_COLZ.png
[eps] [pdf] [png]

Scatter plot showing the gain variation seen by the laser and the cesium systems in % as for channels in layers A, BC and D in the period between July 17th 2015 to November 3rd. The LHC delivered luminosity during this period corresponds to 3.9 fb-1. PMTs with bad quality status, problematic high voltage or flagged as affected by any calibration system have been excluded. Layer A is closer to the collision point, thus it displays larger drifts.

Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 25 September 2018

y2015_iovII_CsLas_SCAT.png
[eps] [pdf] [png]

Ratio of laser calibration constants over cesium calibration constants for channels in Layer A, BC and D in the long barrel. The calibration constant is defined as f = 1/(1+$\Delta$drift), where $\Delta$drift is the drift observed between July 17th 2015 to November 3rd. The LHC delivered luminosity during this period corresponds to 3.9 fb-1. A Gaussian function is fitted to distribution of the ratio fLas/fCs corresponding to each longitudinal layer. The fitted parameters are shown on the plot. PMTs with bad quality status, problematic high voltage or flagged as affected by any calibration system have been excluded. The fitted mean, ‘bias’, is used to assess the agreement between the laser and Cesium measurements. Any deviations from 1.0 can be interpreted as a bias in the laser measurement or scintillator ageing effect (seen by Cesium but not laser). The width is correlated to the laser measurement precision (assuming no uncertainty from Cesium measurement).

Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 25 September 2018

y2015_iovII_CsLas_Ratio_LB.png
[eps] [pdf] [png]

Ratio of laser calibration constants over cesium calibration constants for channels in Layer A, BC and D in the extended barrel. The calibration constant is defined as f = 1/(1+$\Delta$drift), where $\Delta$drift is the drift observed between July 17th 2015 to November 3rd. The LHC delivered luminosity during this period corresponds to 3.9 fb-1. A Gaussian function is fitted to distribution of the ratio fLas/fCs corresponding to each longitudinal layer. The fitted parameters are shown on the plot. PMTs with bad quality status, problematic high voltage or flagged as affected by any calibration system have been excluded. The fitted mean, ‘bias’, is used to assess the agreement between the laser and Cesium measurements. Any deviations from 1.0 can be interpreted as a scintillator ageing effect (seen by Cesium but not laser). The width is correlated to the laser measurement precision (assuming no uncertainty from Cesium measurement).

Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 25 September 2018

y2015_iovII_CsLas_Ratio_EB.png
[eps] [pdf] [png]

Gain variation seen by the laser and the cesium systems in % as for the all channels in the period between April 15th, 2016 to May 24th 2016. The LHC delivered luminosity during this period corresponds to 641.4 pb-1. PMTs with bad quality status, problematic high voltage or flagged as affected by any calibration system have been excluded.

Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 25 September 2018

y2016_iovI_CsLas_COLZ.png
[eps] [pdf] [png]

Scatter plot showing the gain variation seen by the laser and the cesium systems in % as for channels in layers A, BC and D in the period between April 15th, 2016 to May 24th 2016. The LHC delivered luminosity during this period corresponds to 641.4 pb-1. PMTs with bad quality status, problematic high voltage or flagged as affected by any calibration system have been excluded. Layer A is closer to the collision point, thus it displays larger drifts.

Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 25 September 2018

y2016_iovI_CsLas_SCAT.png
[eps] [pdf] [png]

Ratio of laser calibration constants over cesium calibration constants for channels in Layer A, BC and D in the long barrel. The calibration constant is defined as f = 1/(1+$\Delta$drift), where $\Delta$drift is the drift observed between April 15th, 2016 to May 24th 2016. The LHC delivered luminosity during this period corresponds to 641.4 pb-1. A Gaussian function is fitted to distribution of the ratio fLas/fCs corresponding to each longitudinal layer. The fitted parameters are shown on the plot. PMTs with bad quality status, problematic high voltage or flagged as affected by any calibration system have been excluded. The fitted mean, ‘bias’, is used to assess the agreement between the laser and Cesium measurements. Any deviations from 1.0 can be interpreted as a bias in the laser measurement or scintillator ageing effect (seen by Cesium but not laser). The width is correlated to the laser measurement precision (assuming no uncertainty from Cesium measurement).

Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 25 September 2018

y2016_iovI_CsLas_Ratio_LB.png
[eps] [pdf] [png]

Ratio of laser calibration constants over cesium calibration constants for channels in Layer A, BC and D in the extended barrel. The calibration constant is defined as f = 1/(1+$\Delta$drift), where $\Delta$drift is the drift observed between April 15th, 2016 to May 24th 2016. The LHC delivered luminosity during this period corresponds to 641.4 pb-1. A Gaussian function is fitted to distribution of the ratio fLas/fCs corresponding to each longitudinal layer. The fitted parameters are shown on the plot. PMTs with bad quality status, problematic high voltage or flagged as affected by any calibration system have been excluded. The fitted mean, ‘bias’, is used to assess the agreement between the laser and Cesium measurements. Any deviations from 1.0 can be interpreted as a bias in the laser measurement or scintillator ageing effect (seen by Cesium but not laser). The width is correlated to the laser measurement precision (assuming no uncertainty from Cesium measurement).

Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 25 September 2018

y2016_iovI_CsLas_Ratio_EB.png
[eps] [pdf] [png]

These plots show the ratio between the calibration constants measured with the Laser and the Cesium systems in the long barrel (up) and the extended barrel (down). Both calibration systems measured the gain of the 10000 ATLAS Tile calorimeter photomultipliers. The Laser data were collected during standalone Tile calibration runs in 09th July 2012 and 05th August 2012. Laser runs recorded the same day as the Cesium scans were used to compute the Laser calibration constants. Known pathological channels (<1%) and dead modules were excluded. The mean of the ratio is close to one showing that during this period the scintillators did not suffer from irradiation. The Laser corrections applied between 2 Cesium scans are than a complete correction of the full calorimeter system.


Contact: Djamel Boumediene, Emmanuelle Dubreuil Emmanuelle.Dubreuil@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: December 2012

public_laser_over_cs_lb_p4_log_nofit.png
[png] [eps]
public_laser_over_cs_eb_p4_log_nofit.png
[png] [eps]
This plot shows on the top the evolution of ATLAS total integrated luminosity and on the botom the evolution of the ratio between the response of cells A14 (located at eta=1.35 and inner radius 2300 mm) and the most outer radius cell D5 (eta=1.0 and inner radius 3370 mm) as a function of time in EBC. The response is measured by the Cesium, the Laser and the Minimum Bias calibration systems.

Data are collected during standalone TileCal calibration runs. Each point on this plot corresponds to an average over 64 modules in phi. The measurements are normalized to the first run taken as a reference (taken on 18 February 2011). The error bars correspond to the statistical uncertainty on the average. Because of its stability, at the level of ~0.2%, cell D5 is used as a reference cell in order to be able to study the drift effect combining the various TileCal calibration systems and identify the possible source(s) of the drift. Since laser, cesium and minimum bias integrator show a similar behavior, the drifts that are observed can be attributed mostly to a variation of A14 photomultiplier response and not to the scintillator irradiation.

The downdrift periods coincide with the periods of data taking with high instantaneous luminosity, while the updrifts Coincide with the technical stops (no collisions). The maximum variations are below 1% over all 2011 data taking period with an integrated luminosity of ~5.6 fb-1. The cesium calibration system is used ~every 2 weeks to recalibrate all the cells and restore the electromagnetic scale.


Contact: Vincent Giangiobbe Vincent.Giangiobbe@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: May 2012

TileCalLumi.png
[eps]

Evolution of the mean relative response of E1 and E2 cells to one or more other cells in the ATLAS Tile calorimeter, as measured from both the laser and the cesium calibration systems. For the laser data the light intensity was chosen to trigger the high gain readout of the PMTs. For each type of cells (E1, E2), the mean response was estimated using a Gaussian fit to distribution of PMT response variation with respect to a reference run taken prior to the start of collisions (3 Feb. 2012). PMTs with bad quality status, or problematic high voltage have been excluded. Only statistical uncertainties are shown. The method used to analyze the laser data has a systematic uncertainty of on the average relative response. The method used to measure the response to the Cesium calibration source has a systematic uncertainty of


Contact: Henric Wilkens Henric.Wilkens@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: April 2013

LaserCsGapCrack-ATLASPrelim.png


[eps] [pdf]

Evolution of the mean relative response of E1 and E2 cells to one or more other cells in the ATLAS Tile calorimeter, as measured from both the laser and the cesium calibration systems. For the laser data the light intensity was chosen to trigger the high gain readout of the PMTs. For each type of cells (E1, E2), the mean response was estimated using a Gaussian fit to distribution of PMT response variation with respect to a reference run taken prior to the start of collisions (3 Feb. 2012). PMTs with bad quality status, or problematic high voltage have been excluded. Only statistical uncertainties are shown. The method used to analyze the laser data has a systematic uncertainty of on the average relative response. The method used to measure the response to the Cesium calibration source has a systematic uncertainty of

The LHC delivered luminosity and the ATLAS recorded luminosity (LuminosityPublicResults) are provided for comparison. Three LHC machine development periods (available here (PDF)) are indicated by the dashed lines (21-29 April, 18 June-1 July, and 10-23 September).
Contact: Henric Wilkens Henric.Wilkens@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: April 2013

LaserCsGapCrack-ATLASPrelim-WithLumi.png


[pdf]

The distribution of the difference between the relative variation of the response to minimum bias and cesium currents. The points correspond to all inner and middle layer cells in the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.0 < |η| < 1.7. This distribution uses data collected between the end of April and the end of November 2012. The integrated luminosity is the total delivered in this period.

Contact: Silvia Fracchia silvia.fracchia@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Vincent Giangiobbe vincent.giangiobbe@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: December 2013
Reference: CDS

MinBias-Cesium.png
[eps]

The variation of the response to minimum bias, cesium and laser for cells in the inner layer of the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.2 < |η| < 1.3, as a function of the time.

Minimum bias data cover the period from the beginning of April to the beginning of December 2012. The Cesium and Laser results cover the period from mid-March to mid-December. The variation versus time for the response of the 3 systems is normalised to the first Cesium scan (mid-March, before the start of collisions data taking). The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the proton period. As already observed in 2011 the down-drifts of the PMT gains (seen by Laser) coincide with the collision periods while up-drifts are observed during machine development periods and at the end of the proton data-taking (beginning of December). The Cesium and minimum bias variations are similar, both measurements being sensitive to PMT drift and scintillator irradiation. The difference between minimum bias (or Cesium) and Laser is interpreted as an effect of the scintillators irradiation. The errors bars correspond to the systematic uncertainty summed in quadrature with the module-by-module variation and the statistical \x{fb02}uctuation (the module-by-module and statistical fluctuations dominate).

Contact: Silvia Fracchia silvia.fracchia@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Vincent Giangiobbe vincent.giangiobbe@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: December 2013
Reference: CDS

A13_3systems.png
[eps]

The variation of the response to minimum bias, cesium and laser for cells in the inner layer of the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.2 < |η| < 1.3, as a function of the time.

Minimum bias data cover the period from the beginning of April to the beginning of December 2012. The Cesium and Laser results cover the period from mid-March to mid-December. The variation versus time for the response of the 3 systems is normalised to the first Cesium scan (mid-March, before the start of collisions data taking). The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the proton period. As already observed in 2011 the down-drifts of the PMT gains (seen by Laser) coincide with the collision periods while up-drifts are observed during machine development periods and at the end of the proton data-taking (beginning of December). The drop in the response variation during the data taking periods tends to decrease as the exposure of the PMTs increases. The biggest drop is observed between 1 and 6 fb-1 and is due to PMT gain down-drift. The Cesium and minimum bias variations are similar, both measurements being sensitive to PMT drift and scintillator irradiation. The difference between minimum bias (or Cesium) and Laser is interpreted as an effect of the scintillators irradiation. The errors bars correspond to the systematic uncertainty summed in quadrature with the module-by-module variation and the statistical \x{fb02}uctuation (the module-by-module and statistical fluctuations dominate).

Contact: Silvia Fracchia silvia.fracchia@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Vincent Giangiobbe vincent.giangiobbe@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: December 2013
Reference: CDS

A13_lumi.png
[pdf]

The relative variation of the response to minimum bias currents, after the subtraction of the laser component, as a function of the integrated charge collected in the inner layer cells in the Extended Barrel during the period between the end of April and the end of November 2012. The integrated luminosity is the total delivered in this period. Minimum bias currents are sensitive to irradiation and to the up/down drift of the PMT gains, while laser currents are only sensitive to the PMT gains drift. The laser component has been subtracted in order to monitor the effect of irradiation in the cells.

Contact: Silvia Fracchia silvia.fracchia@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Vincent Giangiobbe vincent.giangiobbe@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: December 2013
Reference: CDS

CellsA_vs_charge.png
[eps]

The relative variation of the response to minimum bias currents, after the subtraction of the laser component, as a function of the integrated charge collected in the middle layer cells in the Extended Barrel during the period between the end of April and the end of November 2012. The integrated luminosity is the total delivered in this period. Minimum bias currents are sensitive to irradiation and to the up/down drift of the PMT gains, while laser currents are only sensitive to the PMT gains drift. The laser component has been subtracted in order to monitor the effect of irradiation in the cells.

Contact: Silvia Fracchia silvia.fracchia@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Vincent Giangiobbe vincent.giangiobbe@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: December 2013
Reference: CDS

CellsB_vs_charge.png
[eps]

The average of the relative variation of the response to minimum bias currents, after the subtraction of the laser component, as a function of the integrated charge collected in the inner layer cells (red squares) and in the middle layer cells (blue squares) in the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.0 < |η| < 1.7, during the period between the end of April and the end of November 2012. The integrated luminosity is the total delivered in this period. Minimum bias currents are sensitive to irradiation and to the up/down drift of the PMT gains, while laser currents are only sensitive to the PMT gains drift. The laser component has been subtracted in order to monitor the effect of irradiation in the cells.

Contact: Silvia Fracchia silvia.fracchia@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Vincent Giangiobbe vincent.giangiobbe@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: December 2013
Reference: CDS

CellsAB_vs_charge.png
[eps]

Ratio of minimum bias currents of cell A13 over cell D5 for run 271048 (beginning of 2015 proton-proton collision data period) as observed in module 1 of the A-side of the Extended Barrel. The entries in the histogram correspond to the measurements per lumiblocks (time interval) in this run. The distribution is fitted with a Gauss function. The fit parameters are displayed in red, the black numbers are the mean and standard deviation of the distribution. Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Cora Fischer cora.fischer@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 4 May 2016
Ratio_0_271048_oD5.png
[eps]

The variation of the response to Minimum Bias, Cesium and Laser for cells in the inner layer of the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.2 < |η| < 1.3, as a function of time. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D5 (0.9 < |η| < 1.1). Minimum Bias data cover the period from the beginning of July to the beginning of November 2015. The Cesium and Laser data cover the period from June to beginning of November. The response variation versus time measured by the Minimum Bias system has been normalised to the response variation measured by the Laser system for the period between 8th and 16th of July (shortly after the start of collisions data taking). The Cesium response variation is normalised to the laser measurement on the 17th of July. The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the proton-proton collision period of 2015. As already observed in 2011 and 2012 the down-drifts of the PMT gains (seen by Laser) coincide with the collision periods, while up-drifts are observed during machine development periods. The drop in the response variation during the data taking periods tends to decrease as the exposure of the PMTs increases. The variations observed by the Minimum Bias and Cesium systems are similar, both measurements being sensitive to PMT drift and scintillator irradiation. The difference between minimum bias (or Cesium) and Laser is interpreted as an effect of the scintillators irradiation. The errors bars correspond to the statistical fluctuations of the per module measurements. Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Cora Fischer cora.fischer@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 4 May 2016
A13.png
[eps]

The variation of the response to Minimum Bias and Laser for cells in the gap/crack region of the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.0 < |η| < 1.1, as a function of time. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D5 (0.9 < |η| < 1.1). Minimum Bias data cover the period from the beginning of July to the beginning of November 2015. The Laser data cover the period from June to beginning of November. The response variation versus time measured by the Minimum Bias system has been normalised to the response variation measured by the Laser system for the period between 8th and 16th of July (shortly after the start of collisions data taking). The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the proton-proton collision period of 2015. As already observed in 2011 and 2012 the down-drifts of the PMT gains (seen by Laser) coincide with the collision periods, while up-drifts are observed during machine development periods. The drop in the response variation during the data taking periods tends to decrease as the exposure of the PMTs increases. The variation observed by the Minimum Bias system is sensitive to PMT drift and scintillator irradiation. The difference between Minimum Bias and Laser is interpreted as an effect of the scintillators irradiation. The errors bars correspond to the statistical fluctuations of the per module measurements. Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Cora Fischer cora.fischer@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 4 May 2016
E1.png
[eps]

The variation of the response to Minimum Bias and Laser for cells in the gap/crack region of the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.1 < |η| < 1.2, as a function of time. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D5 (0.9 < |η| < 1.1). Minimum Bias data cover the period from the beginning of July to the beginning of November 2015. The Laser data cover the period from June to beginning of November. The response variation versus time measured by the Minimum Bias system has been normalised to the response variation measured by the Laser system for the period between 8th and 16th of July (shortly after the start of collisions data taking). The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the proton-proton collision period of 2015. As already observed in 2011 and 2012 the down-drifts of the PMT gains (seen by Laser) coincide with the collision periods, while up-drifts are observed during machine development periods. The drop in the response variation during the data taking periods tends to decrease as the exposure of the PMTs increases. The variation observed by the Minimum Bias system is sensitive to PMT drift and scintillator irradiation. The difference between Minimum Bias and Laser is interpreted as an effect of the scintillators irradiation. The errors bars correspond to the statistical fluctuations of the per module measurements. Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Cora Fischer cora.fischer@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 4 May 2016
E2.png
[eps]

The variation of the response to Minimum Bias and Laser for cells in the gap/crack region of the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.2 < |η| < 1.4, as a function of time. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D5 (0.9 < |η| < 1.1). Minimum Bias data cover the period from the beginning of July to the beginning of November 2015. The Laser data cover the period from June to beginning of November. The response variation versus time measured by the Minimum Bias system has been normalised to the response variation measured by the Laser system for the period between 8th and 16th of July (shortly after the start of collisions data taking). The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the proton-proton collision period of 2015. As already observed in 2011 and 2012 the down-drifts of the PMT gains (seen by Laser) coincide with the collision periods, while up-drifts are observed during machine development periods. The drop in the response variation during the data taking periods tends to decrease as the exposure of the PMTs increases. The variation observed by the Minimum Bias system is sensitive to PMT drift and scintillator irradiation. The difference between Minimum Bias and Laser is interpreted as an effect of the scintillators irradiation. The errors bars correspond to the statistical fluctuations of the per module measurements. Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Cora Fischer cora.fischer@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 4 May 2016
E3.png
[eps]

The variation of the response to Minimum Bias and Laser for cells in the gap/crack region of the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.4 < |η| < 1.6, as a function of time. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D5 (0.9 < |η| < 1.1). Minimum Bias data cover the period from the beginning of July to the beginning of November 2015. The Laser data cover the period from June to beginning of November. The response variation versus time measured by the Minimum Bias system has been normalised to the response variation measured by the Laser system for the period between 8th and 16th of July (shortly after the start of collisions data taking). The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the proton-proton collision period of 2015. As already observed in 2011 and 2012 the down-drifts of the PMT gains (seen by Laser) coincide with the collision periods, while up-drifts are observed during machine development periods. The drop in the response variation during the data taking periods tends to decrease as the exposure of the PMTs increases. The variation observed by the Minimum Bias system is sensitive to PMT drift and scintillator irradiation. The difference between Minimum Bias and Laser is interpreted as an effect of the scintillators irradiation. The errors bars correspond to the statistical fluctuations of the per module measurements. Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Cora Fischer cora.fischer@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 4 May 2016
E4.png
[eps]

The relative response variation measured by the Minimum Bias system, after the subtraction of the PMT drift component measured by the Laser system, as a function of the integrated charge collected in the inner layer cells in the Extended Barrel during the period between the beginning of July to the beginning of November 2015. The integrated luminosity is the total delivered in this period. Minimum Bias currents are sensitive to irradiation and to the up/down drift of the PMT gains, while Laser currents are only sensitive to the PMT gains drift. The Laser component has been subtracted in order to monitor the effect of irradiation in the cells. Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Cora Fischer cora.fischer@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 4 May 2016
ChargeMLasernewref_Acells2015.png
[eps]

The relative response variation measured by the Minimum Bias system, after the subtraction of the PMT drift component measured by the Laser system, as a function of the integrated charge collected in the inner layer cells (blue dots) and in the cells in the gap/crack region (green dots) in the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.0 < |η| < 1.7, during the period between the beginning of July to the beginning of November 2015. The average is also shown by green squares (blue circles) for the gap/crack (inner layer) cells. The integrated luminosity is the total delivered in this period. Minimum Bias currents are sensitive to irradiation and to the up/down drift of the PMT gains, while Laser currents are only sensitive to the PMT gains drift. The Laser component has been subtracted in order to monitor the effect of irradiation in the cells. The average variation of both types of cells agree within the statistical uncertainty for the overlapping integrated charge range. Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Cora Fischer cora.fischer@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 4 May 2016
irradiation_profile.png
[eps]

The variation of the response to Minimum Bias and Laser for cells in the inner layer of the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.2 < |η| < 1.3, as a function of time. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6 (1.1 < |η| < 1.3). Minimum Bias and Laser data cover the period from the end of May to the end of October 2016. The response variation versus time measured by the Minimum Bias system has been normalised to the response variation measured by the Laser system on May 24th (first point shown in the plot, right after the Cesium scan). The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the proton-proton collision period of 2016. As already observed in 2011, 2012 and 2015 the down-drifts of the PMT gains (seen by Laser) coincide with the collision periods, while up-drifts are observed during machine development periods. The drop in the response variation during the data taking periods tends to decrease as the exposure of the PMTs increases. The variations observed by the Minimum Bias are sensitive to PMT drift and scintillator irradiation. The difference between minimum bias and Laser is interpreted as an effect of the scintillators irradiation. Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Cora Fischer cora.fischer@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 19 December 2016
2016_MB_A13.png
[eps]

The variation of the response to Minimum Bias and Laser for cells in the gap/crack region of the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.0 < |η| < 1.1, as a function of time. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6 (1.1 < |η| < 1.3). Minimum Bias and Laser data cover the period from the end of May to the end of October 2016. The response variation versus time measured by the Minimum Bias system has been normalised to the response variation measured by the Laser system on May 24th (first point shown in the plot, right after the Cesium scan). The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the proton-proton collision period of 2016. As already observed in 2011, 2012 and 2015 the down-drifts of the PMT gains (seen by Laser) coincide with the collision periods, while up-drifts are observed during machine development periods. The drop in the response variation during the data taking periods tends to decrease as the exposure of the PMTs increases. The variations observed by the Minimum Bias are sensitive to PMT drift and scintillator irradiation. The difference between minimum bias and Laser is interpreted as an effect of the scintillators irradiation. Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Cora Fischer cora.fischer@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 19 December 2016
2016_MB_E1.png
[eps]

The variation of the response to Minimum Bias and Laser for cells in the gap/crack region of the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.1 < |η| < 1.2, as a function of time. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6 (1.1 < |η| < 1.3). Minimum Bias and Laser data cover the period from the end of May to the end of October 2016. The response variation versus time measured by the Minimum Bias system has been normalised to the response variation measured by the Laser system on May 24th (first point shown in the plot, right after the Cesium scan). The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the proton-proton collision period of 2016. As already observed in 2011, 2012 and 2015 the down-drifts of the PMT gains (seen by Laser) coincide with the collision periods, while up-drifts are observed during machine development periods. The drop in the response variation during the data taking periods tends to decrease as the exposure of the PMTs increases. The variations observed by the Minimum Bias are sensitive to PMT drift and scintillator irradiation. The difference between minimum bias and Laser is interpreted as an effect of the scintillators irradiation. Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Cora Fischer cora.fischer@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 19 December 2016
2016_MB_E2.png
[eps]

The variation of the response to Minimum Bias and Laser for cells in the gap/crack region of the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.2 < |η| < 1.4, as a function of time. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6 (1.1 < |η| < 1.3). Minimum Bias and Laser data cover the period from the end of May to the end of October 2016. The response variation versus time measured by the Minimum Bias system has been normalised to the response variation measured by the Laser system on May 24th (first point shown in the plot, right after the Cesium scan). The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the proton-proton collision period of 2016. As already observed in 2011, 2012 and 2015 the down-drifts of the PMT gains (seen by Laser) coincide with the collision periods, while up-drifts are observed during machine development periods. The drop in the response variation during the data taking periods tends to decrease as the exposure of the PMTs increases. The variations observed by the Minimum Bias are sensitive to PMT drift and scintillator irradiation. The difference between minimum bias and Laser is interpreted as an effect of the scintillators irradiation. Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Cora Fischer cora.fischer@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 19 December 2016
2016_MB_E3.png
[eps]

The variation of the response to Minimum Bias and Laser for cells in the gap/crack region of the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.4 < |η| < 1.6, as a function of time. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6 (1.1 < |η| < 1.3). Minimum Bias and Laser data cover the period from the end of May to the end of October 2016. The response variation versus time measured by the Minimum Bias system has been normalised to the response variation measured by the Laser system on May 24th (first point shown in the plot, right after the Cesium scan). The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the proton-proton collision period of 2016. As already observed in 2011, 2012 and 2015 the down-drifts of the PMT gains (seen by Laser) coincide with the collision periods, while up-drifts are observed during machine development periods. The drop in the response variation during the data taking periods tends to decrease as the exposure of the PMTs increases. The variations observed by the Minimum Bias are sensitive to PMT drift and scintillator irradiation. The difference between minimum bias and Laser is interpreted as an effect of the scintillators irradiation. Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Cora Fischer cora.fischer@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 19 December 2016
2016_MB_E4.png
[eps]

The relative response variation measured by the Minimum Bias system, after the subtraction of the PMT drift component measured by the Laser system, as a function of the integrated charge collected in the cells in the gap/crack region in the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.0 < |η| < 1.6 and in the cells in the inner layer of the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.2 < |η| < 1.3, during the period between the end of May to the end of October 2016, covering most of the proton-proton collisions period. The average per cell type is also shown. The integrated luminosity is the total delivered in the whole proton-proton collisions period. Minimum Bias currents are sensitive to irradiation and to the up/down drift of the PMT gains, while Laser currents are only sensitive to the PMT gains drift. The Laser component has been subtracted in order to monitor the effect of irradiation in the cells. The average variation of both types of cells agree within the statistical uncertainty for the overlapping integrated charge range. Contact: Arely Cortes Gonzalez arelycg@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch Cora Fischer cora.fischer@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 19 December 2016
2016_MB_irradiation_vs_intCharge_A13Ecells.png
[eps]

The variation of the response to Minimum Bias and Laser for cell A12 in the inner layer of the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.1 < |η| < 1.2, as a function of time. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6 (1.1 < |η| < 1.3), which has exhibited less than 1% drift throughout the 2017 collision period. Each Minimum Bias point represents the average of the response variation of a subset of A12 channels, corresponding to the central 80% of the total distribution. Each Laser point represents the average of all channels. Minimum Bias and Laser data cover the period from the beginning of June to halfway November 2017. The response variation versus time measured by the Minimum Bias system has been normalised to the response variation measured by the Laser system on June 12th, corresponding to the first point in the plot. The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the proton-proton collision period of 2017. As already observed in previous years the down-drifts of the PMT gains (seen by Laser) coincide with the collision periods, while up-drifts are observed during machine development periods. Contact: Tal van Daalen tal.van.daalen@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 7 May 2018
2017_A12.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The variation of the response to Minimum Bias and Laser for cell A13 in the inner layer of the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.2 < |η| < 1.3, as a function of time. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6 (1.1 < |η| < 1.3), which has exhibited less than 1% drift throughout the 2017 collision period. Each Minimum Bias point represents the average of the response variation of a subset of A13 channels, corresponding to the central 80% of the total distribution. Each Laser point represents the average of all channels. Minimum Bias and Laser data cover the period from the beginning of June to halfway November 2017. The response variation versus time measured by the Minimum Bias system has been normalised to the response variation measured by the Laser system on June 12th, corresponding to the first point in the plot. The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the proton-proton collision period of 2017. As already observed in previous years the down-drifts of the PMT gains (seen by Laser) coincide with the collision periods, while up-drifts are observed during machine development periods. Contact: Tal van Daalen tal.van.daalen@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 7 May 2018
2017_A13.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The variation of the response to Minimum Bias and Laser for cell A14 in the inner layer of the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.3 < |η| < 1.4, as a function of time. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6 (1.1 < |η| < 1.3), which has exhibited less than 1% drift throughout the 2017 collision period. Each Minimum Bias point represents the average of the response variation of a subset of A14 channels, corresponding to the central 80% of the total distribution. Each Laser point represents the average of all channels. Minimum Bias and Laser data cover the period from the beginning of June to halfway November 2017. The response variation versus time measured by the Minimum Bias system has been normalised to the response variation measured by the Laser system on June 12th, corresponding to the first point in the plot. The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the proton-proton collision period of 2017. As already observed in previous years the down-drifts of the PMT gains (seen by Laser) coincide with the collision periods, while up-drifts are observed during machine development periods. Contact: Tal van Daalen tal.van.daalen@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 7 May 2018
2017_A14.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The variation of the response to Minimum Bias and Laser for cell E1 in the gap/crack region of the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.0 < |η| < 1.1, as a function of time. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6 (1.1 < |η| < 1.3), which has exhibited less than 1% drift throughout the 2017 collision period. Each Minimum Bias point represents the average of the response variation of a subset of E1 channels, corresponding to the central 80% of the total distribution. Each Laser point represents the average of all channels. Minimum Bias and Laser data cover the period from the beginning of June to halfway November 2017. The response variation versus time measured by the Minimum Bias system has been normalised to the response variation measured by the Laser system on June 12th, corresponding to the first point in the plot. The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the proton-proton collision period of 2017. As already observed in previous years the down-drifts of the PMT gains (seen by Laser) coincide with the collision periods, while up-drifts are observed during machine development periods. Contact: Tal van Daalen tal.van.daalen@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 7 May 2018
2017_E1.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The variation of the response to Minimum Bias and Laser for cell E2 in the gap/crack region of the Extended Barrel, covering the region 1.1 < |η| < 1.2, as a function of time. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6 (1.1 < |η| < 1.3), which has exhibited less than 1% drift throughout the 2017 collision period. Each Minimum Bias point represents the average of the response variation of a subset of E2 channels, corresponding to the central 80% of the total distribution. Each Laser point represents the average of all channels. Minimum Bias and Laser data cover the period from the beginning of June to halfway November 2017. The response variation versus time measured by the Minimum Bias system has been normalised to the response variation measured by the Laser system on June 12th, corresponding to the first point in the plot. The integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the proton-proton collision period of 2017. As already observed in previous years the down-drifts of the PMT gains (seen by Laser) coincide with the collision periods, while up-drifts are observed during machine development periods. Contact: Tal van Daalen tal.van.daalen@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 7 May 2018
2017_E2.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The relative light yield $I/I_0$ of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the A12 cell as a function of the deposited dose for the year 2017. The relative light yield is derived from the difference in the response to Minimum Bias ($\Delta R_{MB}$) events and Laser pulses ($\Delta R_{Las}$) and interpreted as the light yield loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, and it is defined as $I/I_0=1+(\Delta R_{MB}-\Delta R_{Las})/100\%$. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6. MB and Laser data cover the 2017 proton-proton collision period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the period. Vertical error bars represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the measurement. The horizontal bars represent the RMS of the different dose values within the cell volume and do not include systematics. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. Reference: CDS , Approval meeting
Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 15 May 2018
LightLoss_dose_A12_2017.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The relative light yield $I/I_0$ of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the A13 cell as a function of the deposited dose for the year 2016. The relative light yield is derived from the difference in the response to Minimum Bias ($\Delta R_{MB}$) events and Laser pulses ($\Delta R_{Las}$) and interpreted as the light yield loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, and it is defined as $I/I_0=1+(\Delta R_{MB}-\Delta R_{Las})/100\%$. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6. MB and Laser data cover the 2016 proton-proton collision period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the period. Vertical error bars represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the measurement. The horizontal bars represent the RMS of the different dose values within the cell volume and do not include systematics. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. Reference: CDS , Approval meeting
Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 15 May 2018
LightLoss_dose_A13_2016.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The relative light yield $I/I_0$ of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the A13 cell as a function of the deposited dose for the year 2017. The relative light yield is derived from the difference in the response to Minimum Bias ($\Delta R_{MB}$) events and Laser pulses ($\Delta R_{Las}$) and interpreted as the light yield loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, and it is defined as $I/I_0=1+(\Delta R_{MB}-\Delta R_{Las})/100\%$. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6. MB and Laser data cover the 2017 proton-proton collision period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the period. Vertical error bars represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the measurement. The horizontal bars represent the RMS of the different dose values within the cell volume and do not include systematics. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. Reference: CDS , Approval meeting
Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 15 May 2018
LightLoss_dose_A13_2017.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The relative light yield $I/I_0$ of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the A13 cell as a function of the deposited dose for the year 2015-17. The relative light yield is derived from the difference in the response to Minimum Bias ($\Delta R_{MB}$) events and Laser pulses ($\Delta R_{Las}$) and interpreted as the light yield loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, and it is defined as $I/I_0=1+(\Delta R_{MB}-\Delta R_{Las})/100\%$. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6. MB and Laser data cover the 2015-17 proton-proton collision period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the period. No $I/I_0$ variation is assumed between collision years. Vertical error bars represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the measurement. The horizontal bars represent the RMS of the different dose values within the cell volume and do not include systematics. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. The black vertical line represents the expected dose by the end of Run 3 (450 fb$^{-1}$). Reference: CDS , Approval meeting
Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 15 May 2018
LightLoss_dose_A13_20151617.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The relative light yield $I/I_0$ of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the A13 cell as a function of the deposited dose for the year 2015-17. The relative light yield is derived from the difference in the response to Minimum Bias ($\Delta R_{MB}$) events and Laser pulses ($\Delta R_{Las}$) and interpreted as the light yield loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, and it is defined as $I/I_0=1+(\Delta R_{MB}-\Delta R_{Las})/100\%$. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6. MB and Laser data cover the 2015-17 proton-proton collision period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the period. No $I/I_0$ variation is assumed between collision years. Vertical error bars represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the measurement. The horizontal bars represent the RMS of the different dose values within the cell volume and do not include systematics. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. Black vertical lines represent the expected dose by the end of Run 3 (450 fb$^{-1}$) and HL-LHC (4500 fb$^{-1}$). Square markers are data from scintillators irradiated with gammas (Cs-137 source) and secondary hadrons from proton beam in Aluminium target (ATL-TILECAL-PUB-2007-010), and the triangle is a measurement from scintillator and fibre irradiation with gammas (Co-60) (CERN/LHCC 96-42). Reference: CDS , Approval meeting
Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 15 May 2018
LightLoss_dose_A13_20151617_lab.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The relative light yield $I/I_0$ of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the A14 cell as a function of the deposited dose for the year 2017. The relative light yield is derived from the difference in the response to Minimum Bias ($\Delta R_{MB}$) events and Laser pulses ($\Delta R_{Las}$) and interpreted as the light yield loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, and it is defined as $I/I_0=1+(\Delta R_{MB}-\Delta R_{Las})/100\%$. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6. MB and Laser data cover the 2017 proton-proton collision period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the period. Vertical error bars represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the measurement. The horizontal bars represent the RMS of the different dose values within the cell volume and do not include systematics. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. Reference: CDS , Approval meeting
Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 15 May 2018
LightLoss_dose_A14_2017.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The relative light yield $I/I_0$ of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the E1 cell as a function of the deposited dose for the year 2016. The relative light yield is derived from the difference in the response to Minimum Bias ($\Delta R_{MB}$) events and Laser pulses ($\Delta R_{Las}$) and interpreted as the light yield loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, and it is defined as $I/I_0=1+(\Delta R_{MB}-\Delta R_{Las})/100\%$. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6. MB and Laser data cover the 2016 proton-proton collision period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the period. Vertical error bars represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the measurement. The horizontal bars represent the RMS of the different dose values within the cell volume and do not include systematics. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. Reference: CDS , Approval meeting
Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 15 May 2018
LightLoss_dose_E1_2016.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The relative light yield $I/I_0$ of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the E1 cell as a function of the deposited dose for the year 2017. The relative light yield is derived from the difference in the response to Minimum Bias ($\Delta R_{MB}$) events and Laser pulses ($\Delta R_{Las}$) and interpreted as the light yield loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, and it is defined as $I/I_0=1+(\Delta R_{MB}-\Delta R_{Las})/100\%$. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6. MB and Laser data cover the 2017 proton-proton collision period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the period. Vertical error bars represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the measurement. The horizontal bars represent the RMS of the different dose values within the cell volume and do not include systematics. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. Reference: CDS , Approval meeting
Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 15 May 2018
LightLoss_dose_E1_2017.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The relative light yield $I/I_0$ of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the E1 cell as a function of the deposited dose for the year 2015-17. The relative light yield is derived from the difference in the response to Minimum Bias ($\Delta R_{MB}$) events and Laser pulses ($\Delta R_{Las}$) and interpreted as the light yield loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, and it is defined as $I/I_0=1+(\Delta R_{MB}-\Delta R_{Las})/100\%$. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6. MB and Laser data cover the 2015-17 proton-proton collision period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the period. No $I/I_0$ variation is assumed between collision years. Vertical error bars represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the measurement. The horizontal bars represent the RMS of the different dose values within the cell volume and do not include systematics. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. The black vertical line represents the expected dose by the end of Run 3 (450 fb$^{-1}$). Reference: CDS , Approval meeting
Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 15 May 2018
LightLoss_dose_E1_20151617.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The relative light yield $I/I_0$ of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the E2 cell as a function of the deposited dose for the year 2016. The relative light yield is derived from the difference in the response to Minimum Bias ($\Delta R_{MB}$) events and Laser pulses ($\Delta R_{Las}$) and interpreted as the light yield loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, and it is defined as $I/I_0=1+(\Delta R_{MB}-\Delta R_{Las})/100\%$. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6. MB and Laser data cover the 2016 proton-proton collision period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the period. Vertical error bars represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the measurement. The horizontal bars represent the RMS of the different dose values within the cell volume and do not include systematics. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. Reference: CDS , Approval meeting
Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 15 May 2018
LightLoss_dose_E2_2016.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The relative light yield $I/I_0$ of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the E2 cell as a function of the deposited dose for the year 2017. The relative light yield is derived from the difference in the response to Minimum Bias ($\Delta R_{MB}$) events and Laser pulses ($\Delta R_{Las}$) and interpreted as the light yield loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, and it is defined as $I/I_0=1+(\Delta R_{MB}-\Delta R_{Las})/100\%$. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6. MB and Laser data cover the 2017 proton-proton collision period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the period. Vertical error bars represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the measurement. The horizontal bars represent the RMS of the different dose values within the cell volume and do not include systematics. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. Reference: CDS , Approval meeting
Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 15 May 2018
LightLoss_dose_E2_2017.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The relative light yield $I/I_0$ of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the E2 cell as a function of the deposited dose for the year 2015-17. The relative light yield is derived from the difference in the response to Minimum Bias ($\Delta R_{MB}$) events and Laser pulses ($\Delta R_{Las}$) and interpreted as the light yield loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, and it is defined as $I/I_0=1+(\Delta R_{MB}-\Delta R_{Las})/100\%$. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6. MB and Laser data cover the 2015-17 proton-proton collision period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the period. No $I/I_0$ variation is assumed between collision years. Vertical error bars represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the measurement. The horizontal bars represent the RMS of the different dose values within the cell volume and do not include systematics. For the nominal dose value the average is taken. The black vertical line represents the expected dose in Run 3 (450 fb$^{-1}$). Reference: CDS , Approval meeting
Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 15 May 2018
LightLoss_dose_E2_20151617.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The relative light yield $I/I_0$ of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the E3 cell as a function of the integrated luminosity for the year 2016. The relative light yield is derived from the difference in the response to Minimum Bias ($\Delta R_{MB}$) events and Laser pulses ($\Delta R_{Las}$) and interpreted as the light yield loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, and it is defined as $I/I_0=1+(\Delta R_{MB}-\Delta R_{Las})/100\%$. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6. MB and Laser data cover the 2016 proton-proton collision period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the period. Vertical error bars represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the measurement. Reference: CDS , Approval meeting
Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 15 May 2018
LightLoss_Lumi_E3_2016.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The relative light yield $I/I_0$ of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the E3 cell as a function of the integrated luminosity for the year 2015-16. The relative light yield is derived from the difference in the response to Minimum Bias ($\Delta R_{MB}$) events and Laser pulses ($\Delta R_{Las}$) and interpreted as the light yield loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, and it is defined as $I/I_0=1+(\Delta R_{MB}-\Delta R_{Las})/100\%$. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6. MB and Laser data cover the 2015-16 proton-proton collision period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the period. No $I/I_0$ variation is assumed between the two collision years. Vertical error bars represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the measurement. The black vertical line represents the expected integrated luminosity by the end of Run 3 (300 fb$^{-1}$). Reference: CDS , Approval meeting
Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 15 May 2018
LightLoss_Lumi_E3_201516.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The relative light yield $I/I_0$ of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the E4 cell as a function of the integrated luminosity for the year 2016. The relative light yield is derived from the difference in the response to Minimum Bias ($\Delta R_{MB}$) events and Laser pulses ($\Delta R_{Las}$) and interpreted as the light yield loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, and it is defined as $I/I_0=1+(\Delta R_{MB}-\Delta R_{Las})/100\%$. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6. MB and Laser data cover the 2016 proton-proton collision period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the period. Vertical error bars represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the measurement. Reference: CDS , Approval meeting
Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 15 May 2018
LightLoss_Lumi_E4_2016.png
[eps][pdf][png]

The relative light yield $I/I_0$ of scintillators and wavelength-shifting fibres for the E4 cell as a function of the integrated luminosity for the year 2015-16. The relative light yield is derived from the difference in the response to Minimum Bias ($\Delta R_{MB}$) events and Laser pulses ($\Delta R_{Las}$) and interpreted as the light yield loss in scintillators and fibres due to irradiation, and it is defined as $I/I_0=1+(\Delta R_{MB}-\Delta R_{Las})/100\%$. The response variation is derived with respect to a reference cell D6. MB and Laser data cover the 2015-16 proton-proton collision period, and the integrated luminosity is the total delivered during the period. No $I/I_0$ variation is assumed between the two collision years. Vertical error bars represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the measurement. The black vertical line represents the expected integrated luminosity by the end of Run 3 (300 fb$^{-1}$). Reference: CDS , Approval meeting
Contact: Rute Pedro rute.pedro@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Date: 15 May 2018
LightLoss_Lumi_E4_201516.png
[eps][pdf][png]


Major updates:
-- MichaelaMlynarikova - 2020-06-02

Responsible: MichaelaMlynarikova
Subject: public

Edit | Attach | Watch | Print version | History: r5 < r4 < r3 < r2 < r1 | Backlinks | Raw View | WYSIWYG | More topic actions
Topic revision: r5 - 2020-11-16 - BeatrizCatarinaPinheiroPereira
 
    • 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 &© 2008-2020 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