Public Forward Detector Plots for Collision Data
Introduction
The following approved plots can be shown by ATLAS speakers at conferences and similar events.Please do not add figures on your own. Contact the responsible project leader in case of questions and/or suggestions.
AFP figures
| 2022 Lumi - https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/AtlasPublic/LuminosityPublicResultsRun3 | |
|
Total Integrated AFP Luminosity in 2022 Cumulative luminosity versus time delivered to (green) and recorded by ATLAS (yellow) during stable beams for p-p collisions at 13.6 TeV centre-of-mass energy in 2022. Also shown (red) is the luminosity recorded while all ATLAS Forward Physics (AFP) detector stations are in physics position and the AFP is being read out by the ATLAS data acquisition system. The luminosity shown uses an initial 13.6 TeV luminosity calibration estimate based on beam-separation scans taken in early 2022. |
 |
2022 Data - ATL-COM-FWD-2022-026 AFP Performance in Run 3: first plots for approval (CDS: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2826256/ )
| |
| Correlation between the x position of reconstructed tracks in AFP NEAR stations and the charged track multiplicity in the ATLAS Inner Detector (ID), shown separately for events with proton on side A or C. Only events with exactly one reconstructed AFP track in each station on one side were used. The ID track selection included requirements of pT > 500 MeV and |η| < 2.5, and only events with reconstructed primary vertex were considered. Events with smaller x AFP NEAR are further from the beam and thus are expected to originate from protons with higher energy loss. The error bars refer to the statistical uncertainty of the mean value. |
 |
| Correlation between the x position of reconstructed tracks in AFP NEAR stations and the total energy measured by the ATLAS Calorimeters shown separately for events with proton on side A or C. Only events with reconstructed primary vertex and exactly one reconstructed AFP track in each station on one side were considered. Events with smaller x AFP NEAR are further from the beam and thus are expected to originate from protons with higher energy loss. |
 |
| Positions of tracks reconstructed in AFP. Only events: triggered by the MBTS trigger, with reconstructed primary vertex and having exactly one track in both NEAR and FAR stations on a given side were considered. In this coordinate system center of the beampipe is expected to be at (x, y) = (0, 10 mm). The lack of events with x ≳ −3 mm is due to beam detector distance. Events with x ≲ −15 mm are filtered out by the TCL collimators or upstream LHC aperture. |
 |
 | |
 | |
 |
|
| Average track multiplicity on the given side in dependence on the bunch number in train weighted by pile-up at that train. Events triggered by ATLAS “central” detector were considered. The shaded bands visualize filled bunches. No dependence on bunch number in train is visible which indicates none or very small dead-time effect in the SiT readout. |
 |
| The x position of the track reconstructed in AFP SiT (FAR station) in events in which a single-train signal in ToF detector was observed. Different colors were used to visualize the SiT regions corresponding to individual trains. The machined x-width of the ToF bars is 3/3/5/5.5 mm for train 0/1/2/3. The differences in the x AFP FAR between sides are due to inaccuracy of global alignment (corrections were not applied). |
 |
 |
|
| SiT planes of the AFP detector are made of 336 × 80 (row × column) pixels with dimensions of 50 μm × 250 μm. This is a two-dimensional representation of hits recorded by SiT plane 1, the second plane closest to the interaction point, at the AFP C-FAR station. SiT Column ID and SiT Row ID represent pixel column number and pixel row number, which are the y-axis and x-axis in ATLAS coordinate system, respectively. In this illustration, the first 1.5M events of run 427929, corresponding to luminosity block 200-206 are taken into account. |
 |
| SiT planes of the AFP detector are made of 336×80 (row × column) pixels with dimensions of 50 μm × 250 μm. This is a two-dimensional representation of hits recorded by SiT plane 1, the second plane closest to the interaction point, at the AFP C-FAR station. SiT Column ID and SiT Row ID represent pixel column number and pixel row number, which are the y-axis and x-axis in ATLAS coordinate system, respectively. In this illustration, the first 1.5M events of run 427929, corresponding to luminosity block 200-206 are taken into account. The following selection is applied: only 1 track reconstructed per station, 1 cluster reconstructed per SiT plane and 1 or 2 hits recorded per SiT plane. |
 |
| Distribution of hit multiplicity recorded by SiT planes at the AFP C-FAR station for run 427929. In this illustration, the first 1.5M events of this run number corresponding to luminosity block 200-206 are taken into account. The fact that the distribution has a local maximum at two hits is the result of tilting the planes by 14 degrees. Events with zero hits are due to: trigger on side A or on ATLAS central detector (no proton expected on C side) or, much less likely, the plane inefficiency. The tail of the distribution is due to shower events. |
 |
| Distribution of cluster multiplicity in SiT planes at the AFP C-FAR station for run 427929. In this illustration, the first 1.5M events of this run number corresponding to luminosity block 200-206 are taken into account. Clusters are reconstructed requiring two adjacent pixels in the same pixel column (long-pixel direction). Events with zero clusters are due to: trigger on side A or on ATLAS central detector (no proton expected on C side) or, much less likely, the plane inefficiency. The tail of the distribution is due to shower events. |
 |
| The distribution of difference of x position (ATLAS coordinate system) between a reconstructed track and a cluster in SiT plane 1 at the AFP C-FAR station for run 427929. In this illustration, the first 1.5M events of this run number corresponding to luminosity block 200-206 are taken into account. The applied event selection: only 1 track reconstructed per station, 1 cluster reconstructed per SiT plane, and 1 or 2 hits recorded per SiT plane. The distribution drawn with the red line is obtained for all interplane alignment parameters set to zero. The distribution drawn in blue shows the situation after performing the interplane alignment procedure and is centered around zero as expected. The values shown as ”Mean” are the mean value of the histograms. |
 |
| The distribution of difference of y position (ATLAS coordinate system) between a reconstructed track and a cluster in SiT plane 1 at the AFP C-FAR station for run 427929. In this illustration, the first 1.5M events of this run number corresponding to luminosity block 200-206 are taken into account. The applied event selection: only 1 track reconstructed per station, 1 cluster reconstructed per SiT plane, and 1 or 2 hits recorded per SiT plane. The distribution drawn with the red line is obtained as all interplane alignment parameters are set to zero. The distribution drawn in blue shows the situation after performing the interplane alignment procedure and is centered around zero as expected. The multi-peak structure of the distribution is an effect of a low and non-Gaussian resolution in the SiT plane on the y-axis (long-pixel direction). The fact that red values are ”exact” while blue values are a bit ”smeared” is due to plane rotation considered in the aligment procedure. The values shown as ”Mean” are the mean value of the histograms. |
 |
| The average value of the difference in x-positions of the tracks and the clusters (residuals in ATLAS coordinate system) as a function y position of the clusters in SiT plane 1 at the AFP C-FAR station for run 427929. In this illustration, the first 1.5M events of this run number corresponding to luminosity block 200-206 are taken into account. The applied event selection: only 1 track reconstructed per station, 1 cluster reconstructed per SiT plane, and 1 or 2 hits recorded per SiT plane. The red points are obtained as all interplane alignment parameters are set to zero. The blue points show the situation after performing the interplane alignment procedure and are centered around zero as expected. The fits to linear dependencies are indicated by dashed lines, which will aid in determining the alignment parameter α (rotation angle about the z-axis), and the fit result is presented with its statistical uncertainties. |
 |
| The evolution of the offset value (δx) in the x-axis (in ATLAS coordinates) of the SiT planes according to the number of iterations. The alignment process starts from the first iteration, which indicates all interplane alignment parameters are set to zero. Corrections are applied to the alignment parameters with each iteration. All values are calculated with reference to SiT plane 0. δx 0,1,2,3 are the final value of δx for the planes. |
 |
| The evolution of the offset value (δy) in the y-axis (in ATLAS coordinates) of the SiT planes according to the number of iterations. The alignment process starts from the first iteration, which indicates all interplane alignment parameters are set to zero. Corrections are applied to the alignment parameters with each iteration. All values are calculated with reference to SiT plane 0. δy 0,1,2,3 are the final value of δy for the planes. |
 |
| The evolution of the angle (α) around the z-axis of the SiT planes according to the number of iterations. The alignment process starts from the first iteration, which indicates all interplane alignment parameters are set to zero. Corrections are applied to the alignment parameters with each iteration. All values are calculated with reference to SiT plane 0. α 0,1,2,3 are the final value of α for the planes. |
 |
|
Pilot Beam 2021 - ATL-COM-FWD-2021-024 Performance Plots from AFP Pilot Beam in 2021 (CDS: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2790412?ln=en )
| |
| Signal registered in ATLAS AFP during pilot beam collisions. Side C, far station, Silicon Tracker layer 0. Data was taken at injection energy sqrt(s) = 900 GeV with β* = 11 m optics (no crossing angle). FAR stations were inserted outside shadow of TCL4 and TCL5 collimators and beam aperture. Hits in rows 0-50 are mainly from diffractive protons whereas rest of the pattern is most probably due to showers. White areas are due to pixels masked in readout. |
 |
|
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011 Performance Plots: AFP Special Runs 2017 (CDS: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2767314 )
| |
| Run 336505 recorded L1AFP_A_OR_C trigger rate (black) pictured alongside the mean pile-up (μ, red) presented in dependence of lumi block. The plot shows that during uninterrupted AFP operation at very low pile-up (μ<<1) the trigger rate depends directly on the pile-up. Lower trigger rates in the beginning of the run are due to higher L1 prescale factor being used (2→1). To increase clarity, only events triggered by the C-side were used to remove the effects caused by noisy pixels in the A-side. |
 |
| Track positions recorded in run 341649, side C, station NEAR, using HLT_mb_sptrk trigger. Only events with exactly one track in the station were plotted. The purpose of this plot is purely illustrative. |
 |
| L1AFP_A_OR_C relative trigger efficiency in dependence on the bunch structure calculated for run 341649. The data is normalized to the highest recorded efficiency (first point). The efficiency decreases for consecutively filled bunches (shaded regions) due to dead time of the AFP SiT trigger. Filled bunches (8) are separated by empty bunches (4-8), during which the SiT trigger is able to partially recover and thus an increase in efficiency is recorded. |
 |
| Distribution of the number of hits per event recorded by pixel layers in near station (C-side) in run 331020 using L1AFP_A_OR_C trigger. Plot focuses on the tails of the distributions showing signatures, which can be interpreted as creation of particle showers in SiT planes – the number of hits recorded in each consecutive layer increases. The events with 0 hits are due to the trigger on A side. Another contribution to zero bin comes from ~1% events, in which the trigger has fired, while no hit was recorded. Differences in geometry of individual planes (i. e. slightly different tilt) cause migration between bins of number of hits 1 and 2. Additionally, non-zero bins might be populated by firing of noisy pixels, although this effect was studied to be very small (<1‰ for this run). |
 |
| Distribution of the number of hits per event recorded by pixel layers in near station (C-side) in run 331020 using L1AFP_A_OR_C trigger. The plot zooms-in on the distribution showing the maximum number of hits at 2, which is an expected number of pixels activated by a traversing proton due to the tilt of the pixel planes wrt. the beam axis. The events with 0 hits are due to the trigger on A side. Another contribution to zero bin comes from ~1% events, in which the trigger has fired, while no hit was recorded. Differences in geometry of individual planes (i. e. slightly different tilt) cause migration between bins of number of hits 1 and 2. Additionally, non-zero bins might be populated by firing of noisy pixels, although this effect was studied to be very small (<1‰ for this run). |
 |
| Distribution of the differences of recorded total charge of consecutive layers in run 331020 using L1AFP_A_OR_C trigger. The tails of the distributions may be interpreted as creation of particle showers in SiT planes - the total charge is larger for farther planes. |
 |
|
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002 Plots of luminosity measurements with AFP (CDS: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2752592 )
| |
|
The plots show the results of a preliminary analysis of 2018 AFP data, aimed at the luminosity measurement. The quantity measured is the average number of interactions per bunch crossing, <μ> , determined, for each luminosity block, from the average number of AFP tracks, |
 |
|
For full description see above.
Plot:
Relative difference between the values of |
 |
|
For full description see above.
Plot:
Relative difference between the values of |
 |
|
For full description see above.
Plot:
Relative difference between the values of |
 |
|
For full description see above.
Plot:
Relative difference between the values of |
 |
|
For full description see above.
Plot:
Relative difference between the values of |
 |
|
For full description see above.
Plot:
Relative difference between the values of |
 |
|
For full description see above.
Plot:
Relative difference between the values of |
 |
|
RUN2 - ATL-COM-FWD-2020-008 AFP Alignment with 2017 Data (CDS: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2723730 )
| |
| Data-driven method of global alignment of AFP detectors based on exclusive μμ events. |
 |
|
RUN2 - PLOT-FDET-2019-17 AFP-SiT Interplane Alignment (CDS: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2675953/)
| |
| A comparison of the y-residual distribution before alignment has taken place (blue) and after alignment (red), corresponding to 20 iterations of the algorithm, with a reduced-chi2 < 2 cut applied on tracks after the 10th iteration. Results are shown here for the first plane (plane-0) of the A-NEAR AFP station. The residuals are equal to the difference in measured cluster position in the SiT plane to the reconstructed track position, ytrack-ycluster. The plane is considered aligned in the respective direction when the distribution is centred on zero, i.e. the measured cluster hit positions equal the reconstructed track positions. The average residual value is calculated from a Gaussian fit and is equal to (15:21+-0:04) μm before any iterations, and is (-0:03+-0:04) μm at 20 iterations, consistent with zero. Uncertainties given are statistical only. |
 |
| The average residual value in y as a function of position in the x-direction, for the first plane of the A-NEAR station (plane-0). |
 |
| The alignment in the x-direction over 20 iterations of the algorithm for the A-NEAR station, where dx is the calculated offset from zero. Each coloured line represents one plane of the station. The algorithm begins by assuming perfect alignment, i.e. all parameters of all layers are equal to zero. A reduced-chi2 cut is applied after the 10th iteration to reject any tracks with a reduced-chi2 value greater than 2. All values are calculated relative to the alignment of plane-0, to remove a degree of freedom related to the global positioning of the station. The final values are presented in μm, with a statistical uncertainty calculated using the ATLAS Standard Model Bootstrap Generator tool. The systematic uncertainties have not yet been calculated, but are predicted to be at least an order of magnitude larger than the statistical uncertainties. |
 |
|
RUN2 - PLOT-FDET-2019-16 AFP-ToF Vertex Match in 2017 Data (CDS: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2675832 )
| |
| The distributions of z_ATLAS - z_ToF measured in events with ToF signals on both sides of the interaction region in run 341419, where z_ATLAS is the primary vertex z-position reconstructed by ATLAS. The z_ToF is obtained as z_ToF = -c/2 Delta(t), where Delta(t) is the time difference of proton arrival times in A and C far stations of the AFP measured by ToF. The distributions shown in figures a)-d) correspond to ATLAS data containing a reconstructed primary vertex together with coincidence of signals in both ToF detectors in three cut scenarios with respect to number of vertices reconstructed by ATLAS, 'no N_vtx cut', 'N_vtx <= 5' and 'N_vtx <= 3', respectively. A double Gaussian function representing the signal and background components is fitted to unbinned data samples using the extended likelihood fit as implemented in RooFit in all N_vtx cut scenarios. The mean of the signal component as well as the mean and width of the background component are always estimated from a Gaussian fit to the mixed event data (ME) in each N_vtx cut scenario separately, denoted as mu_sig^FIX, mu_bgd^FIX and sigma_bgd^FIX. The mixed event data z_ATLAS - z_ToF distributions are obtained by random mixing of times measured by ToF in either station and the z_ATLAS values which do not originate in the same collision event. The expected resolution of the ToF detector, quoted as sigma^ToF_expected is obtained from the known single-channel resolutions convoluted with the actual channel-hit-patterns observed in the data in the 'no N_vtx cut' scenario. |
|
| Plots from RUN2 - SiT | |
| In the figure the extrapolated (X,Y) position in the Station A NEAR, Plane 0 of the reconstructed tracks during the HV studies performed in November 2017 is shown. Tracks are reconstructed using plane 1, 2 and 3 using1 or 2 pixel clusters and extrapolated to Plane 0. Different occupancy regions with different track multiplicities are defined and used to study the tracker plane hit reconstruction efficiency. |
 |
| In the figure the hit reconstruction efficiency as a function of bias voltage is shown for three different occupancy regions. The high (medium; low) region is the one with the occupancy between 100% and 70%(70% and 30%; less than 30%) of the 60V data.The efficiency is computed by matching the position of 1 or 2 pixel clusters to the extrapolated tracks within a window of one pixel,and normalized by the total number of tracks. Full efficiency is recovered for all the regions for bias voltages larger than 40V. |
 |
| Plots from RUN2 approved on Feb 2018 | |
| Efficiencies of TOF channels measured in reference samples defined by detection of leading protons in the Si-tracker (SIT). The horizontal magenta boxes indicate the 'core' trains with acceptance directly matching that of the SIT track. The vertical magenta boxes indicate the combined efficiency of each train combined over all channels. The efficiencies were obtained from AFP calibration stream run 331020. The top row of plots represents the FAR-A station and the bottom row the FAR-C station. |
 |
| Efficiencies of TOF channels, presented in the figure above, but for calibration stream run 336505. The top row of plots represents the FAR-A station and the bottom row the FAR-C station. |
 |
| TOF train efficiencies as a function of time in low mu AFP calibration stream runs 331020, 336505 and a high m run 336506. The mu time dependence is superimposed as a magenta histogram. The left and right columns represent the FAR-A and FAR-C stations, respectively. These plots demonstrate little dependence of the efficiency on the rate of incoming leading protons as evidenced by comparison of the train efficiencies in the low and high mu runs. |
 |
| Time measurement resolutions of single TOF channels extracted from AFP calibration stream runs 331020 and 336505. The full error bars represent the statistical uncertainties of the resolution fits and the systematic uncertainties (time measurement correlations between channels and calibrations of the time measurement in the channels) added in quadrature. The time resolutions are extracted from the widths of the distributions of time differences Delta_tij = ti – tj within a single train, where i and j denote channel numbers. |
 |
| Plots from RUN2 approved on Feb 23rd 2017 | |
| Cumulative luminosity versus time delivered to (green) and recorded by ATLAS (yellow) and AFP (blue) during stable beams for pp collisions at 13 TeV centre-of-mass energy in 2017. The delivered luminosity accounts for luminosity delivered from the start of stable beams until the LHC requests ATLAS to put the detector in a safe standby mode to allow for a beam dump or beam studies. The ATLAS recorded luminosity reflects the DAQ inefficiency, as well as the inefficiency of the so-called ‘warm start: when the stable beam flag is raised, the tracking detectors undergo a ramp of the high-voltage and, for the pixel system, turning on the preamplifiers. Shown is the luminosity as determined from counting rates measured by the luminosity detectors. The luminosity shown represents a preliminary 13 TeV luminosity calibration for the 2017 data based on van-der-Meer beam-separation scans in 2017. The blue area reflects time period in which AFP was inserted and recorded data together with ATLAS. |
 |
| Plots from RUN2 approved on May 23rd 2016 | |
| Caption: Trigger rates sent from the AFP detector at nominal 20 sigma position from the beam as a function of number of colliding bunches during LHC luminosity ramp up after YETS 2015-2016. |
 |
| Caption: Number of raw unclustered pixel hits in arbitrary units of a tracker plane in the Near Station side C (205 m from the ATLAS interaction point) in the AFP detector in linear (left) and logarithmic scale (right). Distances are in the local reference frame of the plane. The data was taken during the beam-based alignment (19th of April 2016) at nominal 5 sigma + 400 μm position from the beam. The trigger was set as a logic AND of Near and Far station. The diagonal line corresponds to the detected diffractive protons. |
 |
| Caption: Number of raw unclustered pixel hits in arbitrary units of a tracker plane in the Near Station side C (205 m from the ATLAS interaction point) in the AFP detector in linear (left) and logarithmic scale (right). Distances are in the local reference frame of the plane. The data was taken during the beam-based alignment (19th of April 2016) at nominal 5 sigma + 400 μm position from the beam. The trigger was set as a logic AND of Near and Far station. The diagonal line corresponds to the detected diffractive protons. |
 |
| Caption: Correlation of raw unclustered pixel hits between two consecutive tracker planes in the Near Station side C (205 m from the ATLAS interaction point) in the AFP detector, in events with maximally 2 hits per plane. The data was taken during the beam-based alignment (19th of April 2016) at nominal 5 sigma + 400 μm position from the beam. The trigger was set as a logic AND of Near and Far station. |
 |
| Caption: Number of raw unclustered pixel hits in arbitrary units of a tracker plane in the Near Station side C (205 m from the ATLAS interaction point) in the AFP detector in linear (left) and logarithmic scale (right). Distances are in the local reference frame of the plane. The data was taken during the loss maps (20th of April 2016) at nominal 20 sigma position from the beam. The trigger was set as a logic AND of Near and Far station. The diagonal line corresponds to the detected diffractive protons. Note that during loss maps the beam was moved with respect to its nominal position. |
 |
| Caption: Number of raw unclustered pixel hits per event of a tracker plane in the Near Station side C (205 m from the ATLAS interaction point) in the AFP detector. The data was taken during the loss maps (20th of April 2016) at nominal 20 sigma position from the beam. The trigger was set as a logic AND of Near and Far station. The tracker planes were installed at a tilt of 14º (in x-direction) so that each particle is expected to typically fire 2 pixels. Note that during loss maps the beam was moved with respect to its nominal position. |
 |
| Caption: Correlation of raw unclustered pixel hits between two consecutive tracker planes in the Near Station side C (205 m from the ATLAS interaction point) in the AFP detector, in events with maximally 2 hits per plane. The data was taken during the loss maps (20th of April 2016) at nominal 20 sigma position from the beam. The trigger was set as a logic AND of Near and Far station. Note that during loss maps the beam was moved with respect to its nominal position. |
 |
| Caption: Number of raw unclustered pixel hits in arbitrary units of a tracker plane in the Near Station side C (205 m from the ATLAS interaction point) in the AFP detector in linear (left) and logarithmic scale (right). Distances are in the local reference frame of the plane. The data was taken during the 300 bunches LHC intensity ramp-up step (10th of May 2016) at nominal 20 sigma position from the beam. AFP was triggered by ATLAS triggers. The diagonal line corresponds to the detected diffractive protons. |
 |
| Caption: Number of raw unclustered pixel hits per event of a tracker plane in the Near Station side C (205 m from the ATLAS interaction point) in the AFP detector. The data was taken during the 300 bunches LHC intensity ramp-up step (10th of May 2016) at nominal 20 sigma position from the beam. AFP was triggered by ATLAS triggers. The tracker planes were installed at a tilt of 14º (in x-direction) so that each particle is expected to typically fire 2 pixels. |
 |
| Caption: Correlation of raw unclustered pixel hits between two consecutive tracker planes in the Near Station side C (205 m from the ATLAS interaction point) in the AFP detector, in events with maximally 2 hits per plane. The data was taken during the 300 bunches LHC intensity ramp-up step (10th of May 2016) at nominal 20 sigma position from the beam. AFP was triggered by ATLAS triggers. |
 |
| Simulation plots approved for TDR on June 2015 | |
| Some general comments: AFP simulation is based on the Hamburg Beam Pipe (HBP) setup which consists of two HBPs per ATLAS side: inner station with Silicon Detector and outer station with Silicon and two Timing Detectors The design will change in the future to Roman Pots (RP) setup and different layout of Timing Detectors. It is expected this will reduce the material scattering effects. Primary events are generated using HERWIG++ and H1 2007 Jets Pomeron PDF (Double Pomeron Exchange jets with 20 < pTjet < 80 GeV filter cut) Pile-up events are generated using PYTHIA8 and A2MSTW2008LO PDF (Minimum Bias with Elastic and Single+Double Diffractive processes) No cuts on diffractive protons kinematics are made | |
| Caption: Schematic sketch of the AFP stations. Inner stations are placed at z = ± 204 m (AFP 204) while the outer at z = ± 212 m (AFP 212) from the ATLAS Interaction Point. |
 |
| Caption: Cross section of the outer (AFP 212) Hamburg Beam Pipe model, with 6-layer Silicon Detector and a pair of 8-bar Timing Detectors. Pipe element on the left is the beam entrance. |
 |
| Caption: x-y track positions hitmap for outer SiD station before track matching included for outer (AFP 212) station. Positions are calculated in the ATLAS Coordinate System. Tracks matched between inner and outer SiD stations are considered. μ = 1 scenario is shown. |
 |
| Caption: x-y track positions hitmap for outer SiD station after track matching included for outer (AFP 212) station. Positions are calculated in the ATLAS Coordinate System. Tracks matched between inner and outer SiD stations are considered. μ = 1 scenario is shown. |
 |
| Caption: Reconstructed track multiplicity in AFP Silicon Detector (SiD) for inner (AFP 204) station before the track matching is included. Events are generated without any cut on the proton kinematics (i.e. ξ < 1). Approximately 50% of protons in the sample do not enter the AFP acceptance region (0.015 < ξ < 0.15) which results in no reconstructed track. Different pile-up scenarios are presented. |
 |
| Caption: Reconstructed track multiplicity in AFP Silicon Detector (SiD) for outer (AFP 212) station before the track matching is included. Events are generated without any cut on the proton kinematics (i.e. ξ < 1). Approximately 50% of protons in the sample do not enter the AFP acceptance region (0.015 < ξ < 0.15) which results in no reconstructed track. Different pile-up scenarios are presented. |
 |
| Caption: Proton track reconstruction efficiency for different pile-up scenarios as a function of proton relative energy loss. Tracks matched between the inner (AFP 204) and outer (AFP 212) stations are included. Events with track multiplicity ≤ 2 in inner and track multiplicity ≤ 5 in outer station are considered. |
 |
| Caption: Reconstructed track x position resolution for outer (AFP 212) station. Flat shape is caused by non-staggered detector layers. The pixel size is 50 μm in x and 250 μm in y. μ = 1 scenario is shown. |
 |
ALFA figures
|
Pilot Beam 2021 - ATL-COM-FWD-2021-024 Performance Plots from AFP Pilot Beam in 2021 (CDS: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2790412?ln=en )
| |
| Signal registered in ATLAS ALFA during pilot beam splashes (29/10/2021). Side C, far station, upper pot: RP7 (B7R1U). In this station new motherboard was installed during LS2 and positively tested during pilot beams. |
 |
| Plots approved from RUN2 | |
| Alignment parameters (X Offset, Rotation, Y Offset) for different runs from October 2015 campaign - for the detectors on the side A. The median of each parameter is subtracted from results for each detector. Only statistical uncertainties are shown. The dependence for X and Y is very similar for all detectors. This suggests that the effect is related to the different beam position during each run. The dependence for rotation is negligible. |
 |
| Plots approved from RUN1 | |
| The relative resolution for different reconstruction methods. The dotted line shows the resolution without contribution from detector resolution, accounting only for beam effects. It is the same for all methods. |
 |
| β*= 90m run The following 6 Figures (identified by BH-xx) contain plots of the LHC beam halo background rates recorded the ALFA sub-detector in a special run during LHC fill 2232 with a dedicated optics β⋆ = 90m in October 2011. The ALFA set-up consists of 4 Roman Pot detectors on each side of the ATLAS interaction point at a distance of 240m which are used to measure the spatial distribution of the halo background. Beam Halo Background Rates The background rates were determined by requesting a first level trigger signal from a single ALFA detector, a reconstructed track in two subsequent detectors at one side with a veto on all six other detectors, in order to reject elastic events originating from interactions. Single diffractive events were suppressed by imposing a veto on the Minimum Bias detectors MBTS, LUCID, ZDC at the first level trigger stage and a veto on the TE20 trigger (total transverse energy sum from calorimeters above 20 GeV threshold). The background rate density is normalized to the current in each bunch group per beam, distinguishing between the single bunch of nominal current on one side and the group of 13 pilot bunches with small currents on the other side. Figure BH-1: the background halo rate density is shown as a function of the vertical coordinate for the nominal bunch and for all eight ALFA Roman Pot detectors. The detectors were placed at a distance of about 5.5mm from the beam centre. The detectors B7L1 are located at the A-side of ATLAS at a distance of 241m from IP1, the detectors A7L1 at 237m, the detectors A7R1 resp. B7R1 are at the Cside at distances of 237m resp. 241m, and labels U resp. L denote the upper and lower detectors. |
 |
| β*= 90m run Figure BH-2: Beam halo background rates as function of the horizontal coordinate for a bunch of nominal intensity. |
 |
| β*= 90m run Figure BH-3: Beam halo background rates as function of the vertical coordinate for the group of pilot bunches.Despite the fact that the bunch intensities of the pilot bunches are only 20-30% larger than for the pilot bunches, the rate is larger by a factor of about 10 and the shape of the halo in particular in the horizontal plane is very different, indicating that the halo is composed of several distinct contributions. |
 |
| β*= 90m run Figure BH-4: Beam halo background rates as function of the horizontal coordinate for the group of pilot bunches. |
 |
| β*= 90m run Figure BH-5: Beam halo background rates as function of the vertical coordinate comparing the nominal bunch with the pilot bunches for four selected ALFA detectors. |
 |
| β*= 90m run Figure BH-6: Beam halo background rates as function of the horizontal coordinate comparing the nominal bunch with the pilot bunches for four selected ALFA detectors. |
 |
| β*= 90m run The following 4 plots (Figure ED-xx) display events recorded by the ALFA sub-detector in a special run during LHC fill 2232 with a dedicated optics β* = 90m in October 2011 for a measurement of elastic scattering. The ALFA set-up consists of 4 Roman Pot detectors on each side of the ATLAS interaction point at a distance of 240m. Elastic events are produced in a back-to-back topology and are usually reconstructed in 4 detectors, two on each side. In some cases a hadronic shower develops by interaction with the material of e.g. the inner Roman Pot, preventing the proton trajectory reconstruction in the outer detector and leading to a loss of efficiency. Elastic events may also be accompained by an additional proton track from beam halo protons or single diffraction. Event Display Each ALFA detector consists of 10 double-sided plates with 64 scintillating fibres per side arranged in U/V-geometry. In the event displays for all eight ALFA detectors the fibre hits are shown in both U- and V-projections, the hits associated to a reconstructed track are marked by a black dot and the non- associated hits by a green dot. In addition the fibre multiplicities and track coordinates in the plane transverse to the proton trajectory are indicated. ’Golden’ elastic events consist of two back-to-back protons with tracks in a pair of upper detectors on the C-side and in a pair of lower detectors at the A-side, or vice versa. This configuration of four detectors is called an ’arm’. A proton will hit ideally 20 fibres per detector, but the observed average fibre multiplicity is increased to 23 by cross-talk. An example of a golden elastic event in shown in Figure ED-1. In Figure ED-2 an elastic event is shown where an additional track potentially originating from beam halo or single diffration is observed on one side. With the present reconstruction scheme only one track is reconstructed per detector and additional tracks are discarded. The selection of the track is based on the number of fibres associated to the track and the width of the overlap of the selected fibres, which may entail that no track is reconstructed in multi-track events. A typical event leading to an inefficiency is shown in Figure ED-3, where a clear elastic signature is observed in 3 detectors but in the fourth outer detector a hadronic interaction occured leading to a particle cascade with high multiplicity and no track reconstructed. Although the luminosity of this special run was low and hence the mean number of interactions per bunch crossing with about 0.03 very small compared to standard operations, a few exotic events are observed compatible with a pile-up of two elastic events or an elastic event with a single diffraction event. Such a candidate is shown in Figure ED-4, where hits are observed in all detectors, associated in one arm to the tracks of elastic protons and no track being reconstructed in the second arm, while in the latter case the hit pattern is compatible with a pile-up of even two elastic events. Figure ED-1: ALFA event display for an elastic event with a clean proton track in the two detectors on each side of the interaction point. |
 |
| β*= 90m run Figure ED-2: ALFA event display for an elastic event with a clean proton track in the two detectors at the C-side, while to the elastic proton on the A-side a track from a halo or di ffractive proton is overlayed. |
 |
| β*= 90m run Figure ED-3: ALFA event display for an elastic event with a clean proton track in the two detectors at the A-side, while on the C-side the proton track is reconstructed in the inner detector only and a hadronic shower is observed in the outer detector. |
 |
| β*= 90m run Figure ED-4: ALFA event display for an exotic event with a golden elastic event in one arm of ALFA and an elastic candidate also in the other arm supplemented by a halo track. |
 |
| The following 9 Figures contain performance figures for the ALFA sub-detector from a special run in October 2011 with a dedicated optics of β* = 90m for a measurement of elastic scattering. The data were taken in a combined mode with ALFA and the central ATLAS detector. The presented performance plots correspond to the entire statistics of about 80 µb-1 of recorded luminosity. Scattering angle correlations In Figure 1 the correlation between reconstructed scattering angle using the proton tracks on the right and left side of IP1 is shown for the vertical and horizontal component separately. All elastic candidates defined by the back-to-back topology are included in this sample, which also contains a fraction of accidental halo events. In Figure 2 the scattering angle measurements from the left and right side are combined and the correlation between the horizontal and vertical scattering angle component is shown. In elastic scattering the vertical and horizontal scattering angle distributions are expected to be equal, as can be observed in the symmetric pattern in the correlation of the scattering angle components shown in Figure 2 Cuts are applied in the following to sharpen the elastic topology and suppress the background. The cuts are applied on the proton position correlation at the left and right side and on the correlation between the horizontal track coordinate and the horizontal track angle measured between two detectors on each side, which were found to be most discriminative against non-elastic background. The effect of the background suppression is illustrated in Figure 3 for the left-right scattering angle correlation and in Figure 4 for the horizontal-vertical scattering angle correlation. ALFA performance plots at β*= 90m (RUN OCTOBER 2011). Figure 1: Reconstructed scattering angle correlation between left and right side for elastic candidates before background rejection cuts a) in the vertical and b) in the horizontal plane. |  |
| ALFA performance plots at β*= 90m (RUN OCTOBER 2011). Figure 2: Reconstructed scattering angle correlation between vertical and horizontal planes combining the left and right arm of ALFA, before background rejection cuts. |  |
| ALFA performance plots at β*= 90m (RUN OCTOBER 2011). Figure 3: Reconstructed scattering angle correlation between left and right side for elastic candidates after background rejection cuts a) in the vertical and b) in the horizontal plane. |  |
| ALFA performance plots at β*= 90m (RUN OCTOBER 2011). Figure 4: Reconstructed scattering angle correlation between vertical and horizontal planes combining the left and right arm of ALFA, after background rejection cuts. |  |
| Alignment The final check of the alignment is done using the so-called global tracks in the vertical plane. The back- to-back topology of the elastics events is used to build out of the two outgoing protons a single track. This track will go through the four detectors constituting an arm, i.e. the two upper detectors on side A and the two lower detectors on side C constitute Arm 1368 while Arm 2457 is built of the two lower detectors on side A and the two upper detectors on side C. The lever arm represents the distance at which the proton would be intercepted at the same vertical position in absence of any magnetic elements. Consequently, the detectors are placed at this distance in order to mimic a straight track. Finally each track is fitted and the residual plots shown in figures from 5 to 8. The mean value of the fitted distributions demonstrate a percision on the relative positioning better than 5 microns. The figure 9 displays for the two detection arms the intercept of the fitted global tracks at s=0. i.e. the ATLAS interaction point. The mean value show an absolute alignment precision in the order of 10 microns. The width of the distribution shows the impact of the angular divergence, i.e. the deviation of the global track from a straight line. ALFA performance plots at β*= 90m (RUN OCTOBER 2011). Figure 5: Residual plots for the two ALFA detectors of station B7L1 on side C. The mean value of the gaussian fit shows the precision of the relative alignment between all detectors. The precision is consequently better than 5 µm. |  |
| ALFA performance plots at β*= 90m (RUN OCTOBER 2011). Figure 6: Residual plots for the two ALFA detectors of station A7L1 on side C. The mean value of the gaussian fit shows the precision of the relative alignment between all detectors. The precision is consequently better than 5 µm. |  |
| ALFA performance plots at β*= 90m (RUN OCTOBER 2011). Figure 7: Residual plots for the two ALFA detectors of station A7R1 on side A. The mean value of the gaussian fit shows the precision of the relative alignment between all detectors. The precision is consequently better than 5 µm. |  |
| ALFA performance plots at β*= 90m (RUN OCTOBER 2011). Figure 8: Residual plots for the two ALFA detectors of station B7R1 on side A. The mean value of the gaussian fit shows the precision of the relative alignment between all detectors. The precision is consequently better than 5 µm. |  |
| ALFA performance plots at β*= 90m (RUN OCTOBER 2011). Figure 9: Distribution of the track intercept at the ATLAS interaction point. The deviation from zero shows an absolute precision on the positioning with respect to the beam in the order of 10 µm. |  |
| First track candidates for the four detectors on side A. The figure represent the event display with the first track canditates for each detector. Shown is the index of hit fibres as a function of the layer index for U- and V-projections of the fibres which are inclined by +- 45 degrees to the vertical direction. The activity seen in the ALFA detectors is mainly coming from showers induced by the interaction of the beam with the beam pipe. Also visible on these figures are the hits related to the electronic noise and all kind of cross talk. The poor track images observed for RP1 and RP6 are related to the non-optimized trigger timing which is still to be done. The track reconstruction is based on an overlap of fibre hits in a narrow forward cone parallel to the beam axis. For each projection, U and V, the number of active layer must be greater than five and all layers must have less than five active fibres. All the detectors were in garage position, which for the upper detectors (odd numbers) corresponds to ~ 41-42 mm distance to the beam center, whereas for the lower detectors (even numbers) it was ~ 44 mm. The data taking was performed in so-called parasitic mode spying on events by ATLAS L1A triggers. In this mode the fraction of events with tracks or showers is on the level of about 3%. |  |
| First track candidates for the four detectors on side C. |  |
| Reconstructed track density observed in the four ALFA detectors on side A. The figure represent the map of the reconstructed tracks. To be reconstructed, in addition to the selection criteria mentioned above, a track must be composed of at least five overlapping hit fibres for each projection. Consequently, the more perpendicular is the track to the detector, the greater is its reconstruction probability. The highest density is clearly seen at the edge of the detector toward the beam centre. The density difference observed at the edge between the upper and lower detectors can be explained by the slightly different positions in respect to the beam center. The red line indicates the geometrical acceptance. Multiple tracks entail fake hits outside the fiducial volume. |  |
| Reconstructed track density observed in the four ALFA detectors on side C. |  |
| ALFA performance plots at β*= 90m. The following ALFA performance plots result from the offline analysis of the ATLAS RUN 184206, taken at June 28th in 2011. The data taking was performed with a β* = 90m optics, 2 colliding bunches with 1 and 2 E10 particles and all ALFA detectors in a distance of 10σ (about 7 mm) to the nominal beam trajectory. With the minimum bias trigger of an OR of the signals from all 8 detectors about 140.000 events were recorded in standalone TDAQ mode. Track reconstruction within the Athena code required at least 5 out of 10 fiber hits per projection. In this first Figure the track maps of all particles passing the 2 ALFA fiber detectors in station B7L1 at ATLAS side A is reported both for the main detectors (MD) and the overlap detectors (OD). The composition of tracks consists of particles from beam gas interactions, protons from the beam halo and elastically scattered protons. |  |
| ALFA performance plots at β*= 90m. In this first Figure the track maps of all particles passing the 2 ALFA fiber detectors in station A7L1 at ATLAS side A is reported both for the MDs and the ODs. The composition of tracks consists of particles from beam gas interactions, protons from the beam halo and elastically scattered protons. |  |
| ALFA performance plots at β*= 90m. Track maps of golden elastic events with a coincidence in the upper (lower) detectors on side A and the lower (upper) detectors on side C. Shown are track maps in station B7L1 with scattered particles from beam 2. Due to the above mentioned analysis constraints there are no reconstructed tracks in the ODs. |  |
| ALFA performance plots at β*= 90m. Track maps of golden elastic events with a coincidence in the upper (lower) detectors on side A and the lower (upper) detectors on side C. Shown are track maps in station A7L1 with scattered particles from beam 2. Due to the above mentioned analysis constraints there are no reconstructed tracks in the ODs. |  |
| ALFA performance plots at β*= 90m. Correlation plot of elastically scattered protons on both sides of the interaction point. Shown are the average Y-coordinates of the A and C sides. The Y-coordinate is proportional to the scattering angle at the IP. In this respect the plot is a clear proofs of the elastic back- to-back event topology at the IP. The width of the correlation line is related to the angular spread at the IP and missing corrections concerning the detector positions. |  |
| ALFA performance plots at β*= 90m. Simulated track maps of elastic events for the β* 90m optics. Events were generated by PHYTIA8 and the transport from ATLAS to the ALFA stations at 241 m distance to the IP performed by the MADX matrix program. Just the positions of passing protons are shown - no reconstruction algorithm was applied. For illustration also tracks points outside the geometrical acceptance are shown. |  |
| ALFA performance plots at β*= 90m. Simulated track maps of diffractive events for the β* 90m optics. Events were generated by PHYTIA8 and the transport from ATLAS to the ALFA stations at 241 m distance to the IP performed by the MADX matrix program. Just the positions of passing protons are shown - no reconstruction algorithm was applied. For illustration also tracks points outside the geometrical acceptance are shown. |  |
| ALFA performance plots at β*= 90m. The back-to-back correlation of protons on both sides of the interaction point is the direct evidence for the observation of elastic events. Shown is the scattering angle in the vertical plane reconstructed at either side of the interaction point using the vertical coordinate and the lever arm calculated from the beam optics. The resolution of the angle Θ*y is further improved by taking the difference between the left and right measurement, whereby the unknown contribution from the vertex position is cancelled. |  |
| β*= 90m run The track patterns in all stations for run 191366. About 10 million triggers were recorded with the minimum bias trigger condition when any detector can trigger the read out. All tracks are shown in the LHC beam coordinate system with a preliminary track-based alignment. All ALFA Roman pots were placed in a distance of 6.5 sigma, about 5 mm, to the beam. The stations A7L1 and A7R1 are located in a distance of 237m to the IP, the other two stations are more far at 241m. |  |
| β*= 90m run The track patterns of candidates of elastic scattering for run 191366 in the LHC beam coordinate system with a preliminary alignment. Only events with reconstructed tracks in all 4 stations were selected. Closer to the center of the beam a significant contribution of accidental beam-beam background combinations is visible. |  |
| β*= 90m run For run 191366 the position correlation of all elastic event candidates. The upper plots show the correlation of X and Y coordinates of combinations from the stations at 237m distance to IP. The lower plots are made for combinations from the stations in 241m distance to IP. As expected due to the beam optics the correlation band is more pronounced in the Y-coordinate. |  |
| β*= 90m run The distances between upper and lower detectors in each station obtained from the differences of Y-coordinates of the same track in the upper and lower overlap detectors. The differences are measured at both sides +X and –X of the main detectors. The data were collected from runs 191367, 191377, 191382, 191383 with 5 million triggers from overlap detector plus run 191366 with 10 million triggers from main or overlap detectors. |  |
| β*= 90m run Statistics of ALFA related trigger items for the combined ATLAS run 191373. The plot compiles the pre-scaled entries from enabled trigger items (blue) and the input rate of all disabled trigger items (red). The pre-scale values are inserted as thin bars (green) in the bins related to the trigger items. A pre-scale factor 1 was used for the elastic triggers, a factor 20 for diffractive triggers and a factor 100 for the minimum bias trigger. In addition a few trigger items for systematic investigations were enabled, e.g. for unpaired bunches. |  |
LUCID figures
| Plots from RUN2 approved on May 29th 2015 | |
| Digitized pulse shape of a signal from one of the photomultipliers in the A-arm of the LUCID detector during a run recorded on the 10th of June 2015 at √s = 13 TeV. The polarity of the pulse is inverted. The FADCs measures the pulse amplitude in time bins that are 3.125 ns long. The duration of the pulse is less than 25 ns, which will be important when LHC starts running with a colliding-bunch spacing as short as 25 ns. |  |
| Bunch-by-bunch hit counts measured by a single LUCID photomultiplier as a function of the bunch-crossing number during a 13 TeV ru n recorded on June 14, 2015 (LHC fill 3858). The LHC was filled with 38 colliding bunches. The large peaks correspond to six trains of six colliding bunches each, plus two isolated colliding bunches. The two smaller peaks are due to single-beam background produced by bunch trains that do not collide at the ATLAS interaction point. The baseline background level, four orders of magnitude below the collision rate, is associated with the Bi-207 source used for monitoring the photomultiplier gain. |  |
| Pulse-height distributions from a LUCID photomultiplier recorded in 13 TeV runs on June 11 and 13, 2015 (blue) and in a calibration run recorded on June 25, 2015 (red). The physics runs were recorded using a random trigger, while the calibration run imposed a trigger-threshold requirement. The position of the peak created by Cherenkov photons produced in the quartz window of the photomultipliers is similar for high-energy particles from LHC collisions and low-energy electrons from the Bi-207 source. The vertical scale is set by the statistics of the low-μ run which has the smallest number of counts. The Bi-207 distribution has been arbitrary scaled down to a similar level. |  |
| Pulse-height distributions from a LUCID photomultiplier during a 13 TeV low-μ run recorded on June 11, 2015 (red) and during a high-μ run recorded on June 13, 2015 (blue). The pulse height is shifted towards higher values when at high luminosity several particles traverse the photomultiplier window in the same bunch crossing. |  |
| Pulse-height distributions from a LUCID photomultiplier during a 13 TeV low-μ run recorded on June 11, 2015 (red) and during a high-μ run recorded on June 13, 2015 (blue). The pulse height is shifted towards higher values when at high luminosity several particles traverse the photomultiplier window in the same bunch crossing. (The same plot as in the Figure above but with a logarithmic vertical scale.) |  |
| Fractional difference in measured luminosity between the forward (A) and backward (C) arms of the LUCID detector. These ATLAS runs cover the LHC startup period from the end of May to July 8, 2015. The gap reflects the combination of a technical stop and of the scrubbing period, during which no collisions took place. The agreement between the two LUCID arms is better than 1%.. |  |
| History of the average number of inelastic pp collisions per bunch crossing during LHC fill 3858, as reported by the BCM, LUCID and TILE luminometers in ATLAS. |  |
| Ratio of the average number of inelastic pp collisions per bunch crossing measured by different ATLAS luminometers, to that reported by the forward (A) arm of the LUCID detector. The backward arm of LUCID (LUCID-ORC), the LUCID coincidence algorithm (LUCID-AND), as well as the luminosity determined using the phototube currents in the TILE calorimeter are consistent within ±0.4% or better. The BCM detector appears to underestimate the luminosity by as much as 2 % early in the fill. This discrepancy slowly decreases as the luminosity decays over time. |  |
| Measured mean charge in calibration runs using the Bi-207 sources. The measurements were performed by the photomultiplier tubes in the forward (A) arm of the LUCID detector. The charge is normalized to 1 for a run on the 11th of June. The mean charge is proportional to the gain of the photomultipliers and a change of 10% for all four tubes results in a change of 1% of the measured luminosity. |  |
| The measured number of OR-events by the LUCID fiber detector as a function of the bunch crossing number during one luminosity block in a fill with 13 TeV collisions recorded on the 21th of May 2015. The collisions were in the first bunch crossing and the inset plot shows that most of the counts are indeed recorded for the first BCID. |
 |
| The measured number of AND-events by the LUCID fiber detector as a function of the bunch crossing number during one luminosity block in a fill with 13 TeV collisions recorded on the 21th of May 2015. The collisions were in the first bunch crossing and the inset plot shows that most of the counts are indeed recorded for the first BCID. This plot has not a single count except for BCID = 1 and this demonstrates how the AND requirement rejects background events and how LUCID is able to measure collisions within a single 25 ns time window. |  |
| The average number of pp-interactions per bunch crossing (mu) measured by LUCID as a function of the luminosity block in a 13 TeV commissioning run recorded on the 21th of May 2015. The mu value was measured by 4 standard Hamamatsu R760 photomultipliers in OR-mode on side C of ATLAS as well as by 4 modified photomultipliers. These modified photomultipliers have a thin aluminium ring between the quartz window and the photocathode in order to reduce the acceptance. The inset plot shows the ratio of the mu values measured by the two detectors. The calibration was obtained from a GEANT Monte Carlo simulation of LUCID in ATLAS and the measured mu for the detector with modified photomultipliers agreed to within 12% with the mu measured with the detector using standard photomultipliers. This difference between two Monte Carlo calibrations in a commissioning run like this is in line with previous experience where Monte Carlo calibrations typically has not achieved a precision better than 20%. All errors in the plot are statistical only. |  |
| The pulseheight distribution from one photomultiplier in the LUCID detector during a 13 TeV run recorded on the 21th of May 2015. The Cerenkov light created in the quartz window of the photomultiplier produces a clear peak in the amplitude distribution that has been fitted by a Gaussian distribution (in red). Only signals above a threshold defining a particle hit are plotted in the figure. |  |
| Number of hits in a single LUCID photomultiplier during data-taking with beam splash events in ATLAS in April 2015. The hits from the beamsplashes are all recorded at the time of a single bunch crossing which illustrates the potential of the new LUCID to measure luminosity for individual bunch crossing when LHC will run with a 25 ns bunch spacing. One can also see hits in the figure from the radioactive Bi-207 source which is used for monitoring the photomultiplier gain and which are seen at all times. |  |
| The number of LUCID events recorded with the OR-algorithm during the 900 GeV collision run in May 2015 as a function of 1 minute long luminosity blocks. The observed decrease in event rate was observed also by other luminosity detectors in ATLAS. |  |
| Plots approved from RUN1 | |
| The LUCID detector is composed by 16 PMTs and 4 fiber bundles readout by PMTs, deployed around the beam pipe symmetrically at about 17m distance with respect to the ATLAS IP. The readout of the 16 PMT provides the baseline system for luminosity algorithms, while the 4 fiber bundles readout by PMT placed in a non highly irradiated area represent the backup readout soluIon (under study for future development). The top plot shows the mean number of interactions per bunch crossing (μ) obtained from the total charge integrated over one BCID by a fiber channel versus the value measured by BCM (red circles) compared to the value obtained with a standard luminosity algorithm (blue triangles). The correlaIon between the μ value obtained with charge integraIon and the one with BCM is linear up to high μ values. The bottom plot shows the ratio data over fit of the two methods: the hit counting algorithm shows μ dependencies while the charge integration doesn’t present any effect. The black line at the ordinate value 1 is used as a guide to the eye. The measured data spread around the linear fit is within + 2.5% for the charge integration method. |  |
| A typical photomultiplier signal recorded by the flash ADC system. The FADC provides 80 samplings with 4 ns intervals. |  |
| A typical time distribution of the fitted peak position of the signal from one photomultiplier as measured by the flash ADC system. The time is here measured with respect to the arrival of the bunch crossing signal but with an arbitrary zero time in the plot. The tail in the distribution is caused by secondary particles with a slightly longer flight path than the primary particles. |  |
| The time distribution of signals from the discriminators. Each column in the plot shows the time distribution of the signals from one photomultiplier. The measurement was done with the local LUCID trigger logic (LUMAT) that has the ability to record the time of its input signals in eight 3.2 ns bins. The plot shows how well the timing of the signals from the 32 tubes is aligned in time. Two tubes were not working during this measurement and did not record any signals. |  |
| The relationship between the amplitude recorded by the FADC and the charge measured by the QDC. The charge has been converted to the number of photo electrons produced in the photomultiplier. A primary particle with a momentum above the Cherenkov threshold that goes through the full length of the cherenkov tube typically produces 110 photoelectrons and it can be seen in the figure that the saturation of the pulseheight measurement starts at around 150 photoelectrons. |  |
| An example of a charge distribution recorded at 7 TeV by the QDC. The charge has been converted to the number of photo electrons produced in the photomultiplier. The data was recorded using the single side trigger that requires at least one hit anywhere in the two detectors. The number of events in the Monte Carlo was normalized to the data using the measured luminosity. The distribution has two peaks. The one at around 110 photoelectrons is caused by particles going through the full lenght of the Cherenkov tube. The second peak around 40 photoelectrons is caused by particles that have only gone through the photomultiplier window and not the gas in the Aluminium tubes. These particles are typically produced by interactions in the tube walls or the beampipe. |  |
| The same plot as above shown with a logarithmic scale. |  |
| The average charge distribution of all the tubes in one of the two detectors at 7 TeV. The charge has been converted to the number of photo electrons produced in the photomultiplier. The data was recorded using the single side trigger that requires at least one hit in one of the two detectors. The number of photoelectrons produced in the Monte Carlo simulation has been increased with a factor 1.12 so that the two peaks from Cerenkov light from only the photomultiplier window and from window+gas agree. The number of events in the Monte Carlo was normalized to the data using the measured luminosity. The charge distribution is compared with Monte Carlo simulations with Pythia as the event generator and using the full Athena detector simulation framework. |  |
| The distribution of the number of hits in events triggered by the single side trigger that requires at least one hit anywhere in the two detectors. A "hit" is here defined as a photo multiplier signal larger than 15 photo electrons. The data is compared to both a Phojet and a Pythia Monte Carlo simulation. |  |
| The same plot as above shown with a logarithmic scale. |  |
| The distribution of the number of hits in events triggered by the coincidence trigger that requires at least one hit both detectors. A "hit" is here defined as a photo multiplier signal larger than 15 photo electrons. The data is compared to both a Phojet and a Pythia Monte Carlo simulation. |  |
| The same plot as above shown with a logarithmic scale. |  |
| The luminosity measured by LUCID at 7 TeV during a fill is shown together with background measurements obtained by measuring the “background luminosity” from non-colliding unpaired bunches. The background level in the single arm trigger is four orders of magnitude below the signal and more than 5 orders of magnitude below the signal when the coincidence trigger is used. |  |
| The instantaneous luminosity measured by LUCID at 7 TeV for 8 different colliding bunches in the machine. The plot shows that the time development of the different bunches is different. The bunch-to-bunch variations in the luminosity is up to 40% at the start of the fill. At a time of about 560 minutes there is a loss of luminosity that affects the bunches differently. Some looses only 4%, others a third of their luminosity.The data was taken during ATLAS run 155697. |  |
| The distribution of the integrated measured luminosity recorded by LUCID at 7 TeV for different LHC bunches (BCID) during ATLAS run 155697. The plot is for the single side trigger. In this fill there was 8 colliding bunches and four pairs of bunches that were made to collide at 11 m away from the normal position of the interaction point. There were also 2 non-colliding bunches in this fill. The bunches with displaced collisions creates a larger background than the beam background. For the single arm trigger they give a background level of about 2% but this is reduced by a factor of 100 when the coincidence trigger is used instead. |  |
| The same plot as above for the coincidence trigger. |  |
ZDC figures
|
Plots approved from LHC Pilot Beam - ATL-COM-FWD-2022-006 Public ZDC plots from the 2021 pilot beam (CDS: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2805122 )
| |
| Figure 1: ZDC Event display #1: Flash ADC (320 Mz) samples read out from a LUCROD FEE board for the three installed ZDC calorimeter modules for a single event recorded during the 2021 pilot run operation of ATLAS. The samples are plotted as a function of time expressed relative to the start of the readout window. The baseline is measured in the first sample and subtracted from the other samples. The red curves show fits to the pulses that are performed as part of the standard ZDC offline analysis. The pulses have shorter rise and fall times, compared to those during Run 2, thanks to the installation during LS2 of air-core cables that carry the signals from the tunnel to USA15. |  |
| Figure 2: Flash ADC (80 Mz) samples read out from the Run 2 electronics (L1Calo) for the three ZDC calorimeter modules, HAD1-HAD3, for a single event recorded during 2018 Pb+Pb data-taking by ATLAS. The samples are plotted as a function of time with the time values shifted to allow direct comparison to data recorded during the 2021 pilot run. The pulses have longer rise and fall times compared to those measured during the pilot run due to the degradation of the signals over the ~200 m of CC50 cable used to carry the signals from the tunnel to USA15 during Runs 1 and 2. The sampling rate of the flash ADCs is also a factor of 4 slower than that provided by the LUCROD. |  |
| Figure 3: ZDC Event display #2: Flash ADC (320 Mz) samples read out from a LUCROD FEE board for the three installed ZDC calorimeter modules for a single event recorded during the 2021 pilot run operation of ATLAS. The samples are plotted as a function of time expressed relative to the start of the readout window. The baseline is measured in the first sample and subtracted from the other samples. The red curves show fits to the pulses that are performed as part of the standard ZDC offline analysis. In this event, the shower maximum lies within the second hadronic module. |  |
| Figure 4: ZDC Event display #3: Flash ADC (320 Mz) samples read out from a LUCROD FEE board for the three installed ZDC calorimeter modules for a single event recorded during the 2021 pilot run operation of ATLAS. The samples are plotted as a function of time expressed relative to the start of the readout window. The baseline is measured in the first sample and subtracted from the other samples. The red curves show fits to the pulses that are performed as part of the standard ZDC offline analysis. The three panels have different y axis ranges because, in this event, most of the energy is deposited in the first module. There is no significant energy deposit in the third module where the data show only noise fluctuations which are typically at the level of +/- 2.5 ADC counts. |  |
| Figure 5: Comparison of the amplitudes of pulses obtained in the trigger (LUCROD) and in the offline analysis for the first installed ZDC module (HAD1) during 2021 pilot run operation by ATLAS. A total of 170 thousand events have pulses in the HAD1 module. Here, for both the trigger and the offline analysis, the pulse amplitude is represented by the maximum flash ADC sample. The agreement between the processing in the trigger firmware and the offline analysis is generally excellent. The outliers mainly result from events with two significant pulses falling in the same bunch crossing. |  |
| Figure 6: Comparison of the amplitudes of pulses obtained in the trigger (LUCROD) and in the offline analysis for the first installed ZDC module (HAD2) during 2021 pilot run operation by ATLAS. A total of 173 thousand events have pulses in the HAD2 module. Here, for both the trigger and the offline analysis, the pulse amplitude is represented by the maximum flash ADC sample. The agreement between the processing in the trigger firmware and the offline analysis is generally excellent. The outliers mainly result from events with two significant pulses falling in the same bunch crossing. |  |
| Figure 7: Comparison of the amplitudes of pulses obtained in the trigger (LUCROD) and in the offline analysis for the first installed ZDC module (HAD3) during 2021 pilot run operation by ATLAS. A total of 150 thousand events have pulses in the HAD3 module. Here, for both the trigger and the offline analysis, the pulse amplitude is represented by the maximum flash ADC sample. The agreement between the processing in the trigger firmware and the offline analysis is generally excellent. The outliers mainly result from events with two significant pulses falling in the same bunch crossing. |  |
| Figure 8: Comparison of the sum of amplitudes obtained in the trigger (LUCROD) and in the offline analysis for the three installed ZDC modules (HAD1-HAD3) during 2021 pilot run operation by ATLAS. A total of 175 thousand events have a pulse in one or more of the modules. Here, for both the trigger and the offline analysis, the pulse amplitude in a single module is represented by the maximum flash ADC sample. The agreement between the trigger sum, which enters the lookup tables used for the ultimate trigger decision, and the offline sum is generally excellent. The outliers mainly result from events with two significant pulses falling in the same bunch crossing. |  |
| Plots approved from RUN1 | |
| The next 4 Figures (1 to 4) ilustrate the performance of the ZDC detectors during the 2010 Heavy Ion run. In particular about their correlation for the OR trigger selection of the sides A and C in order to see that two classes of events with single and mutual neutron emission can be observed (selected) and for the coincidence of the two sides plus a veto on MBTS 1 1 in order to show that in this case the amount of events with ZDC coincidences with large energy is reduced and that mutual EMD (ElectroMagnetic Dissociation) events with the emission of at least one neutron emission by both nuclei can be selected. Plots are shown for the low and high gain data. These performance plots represent data collected by the ZDC detectors during the 2010 HI run, with run number 170004. Figure 1: Correlation plot between the ZDC A and the ZDC C detectors for events passing the L1 ZDC A or L1 ZDC C triggers, shown here is low gain data. |  |
| Figure 2: Correlation plot between the ZDC A and the ZDC C detectors for events passing the L1 ZDC A or L1 ZDC C triggers, shown here is high gain data |  |
| Figure 3: Correlation plot between the ZDC A and the ZDC C detectors for events passing the L1 ZDC AND or L1 ZDC A C coincidence triggers plus a veto on the L1 MBTS 1 1. This selection is made in order to observe events with mutual Coulomb dissociation which is dominated by 1 neutron emission by both nuclei (main spot), shown here is the low gain data |  |
| Figure 4: Correlation plot between the ZDC A and the ZDC C detectors for events passing the L1 ZDC AND or L1 ZDC A C coincidence triggers plus a veto on the L1 MBTS 1 1. This selection is made in order to observe events with mutual Coulomb dissociation which is dominated by 1 neutron emission by both nuclei (main spot), shown here is the high gain data |  |
| Energy distribution as measured by the ZDC-A. Black curve is total events triggered by the ATLAS minimum bias trigger. Red curve is events triggered by the Constant Fraction Discriminator (CFD). The inset is the lower energy part of this figure showing the threshold effect of the CFD. The threshold for full efficiency is approximately 400 GeV. The two figures below describe how the energy scale was set. |  |
| Energy distribution as measured by the ZDC-A for neutron candidates. Black curve is events triggered by the ATLAS minimum bias trigger. Red curve is events triggered by the Constant Fraction Discriminator trigger. A neutron is defined by the longitudinal shower development, i.e., more than 17 GeV was deposited in module 2 and more than 13 GeV was deposited in module 3. The inset is the lower energy part of the figure showing the threshold effect of the discriminator. The threshold for full efficiency is approximately 430 GeV. The energy scale is obtained for neutrons by minimizing the width of the neutron spectra by adjusting the relative gain of the three modules, and then scaling the end point of the final distribution to 3.5 TeV. |  |
| Energy distribution as measured by the ZDC-A for photon candidates. Black curve is events triggered by the ATLAS minimum bias trigger. Red curve is events triggered by the Constant Fraction Discriminator trigger. A photon event is defined by the longitudinal shower development, i.e., less than 17 GeV deposited in module 2 and less than 13 GeV deposited in module 3. Inset is the lower energy part of the figure showing threshold effect of the discriminator. The threshold for full efficiency is approximately 420 GeV. The energy scale for photons was obtained by adjusting the end point of the distribution to 3.5 TeV. |  |
| Pulse amplitude (Ai) vs. time slice for a typical pulse from the waveform digitizer. Each slice is one time bin of the wave form digitizer, and is 25 ns. The pedestal has been subtracted. The ratio A1/A2 is sensitive to time. The value of that ratio is used to determine the time of an event. |  |
| Time of arrival of an event in module 2 vs. that in module 1 in ZDC-A. This correlation on a single arm allows us to determine the time resolution of a single module. The energy deposited in the ZDCs is about 0.5 TeV. |  |
| Distribution of events in module 2 time minus that in module 1 in ZDC-A, divided by square root of 2. The standard deviation of this variable yields the standard deviation in time of a single module. |  |
| Distribution in time of events in ZDC-C minus that in ZDC-A, divided by the square root of 2. This two arm width of 0.26 ns is larger than the single width shown in the figure above, (0.21 nsec) which is consistent with a 4 cm rms in the distribution of p-p interactions along the beam. |  |
| Distribution of events in ZDC-C time minus that in ZDC-A. In this sample there is no requirement on the shower energy other than the trigger L1_ZDC_AND. The time is derived from the module1 waveform using a constant fraction algorithm, which gives somewhat better resolution than in the figure above. |  |
| Event rates vs. beam separation in a Van der Meer scan as seen by the ZDCs. Red points are ZDC-A, and black are ZDC-C. ZDC-A and ZDC-C rates are raw and not normalized to one another. |  |
| Van der Meer scan of 3.5 TeV comparing ZDC two arm coincidences (Red) with MBTS events(Black). The ZDC rates are normalized to the peak of the MBTS rates. |  |
| Similar to the figure above but with ZDC-A inclusive compared to MBTS on a log plot. |  |
| Van der Meer scan of 3.5 TeV showing ZDC-A rate and the coincidence rate of ZDC-A and ZDC-C. |  |
| Energy distribution of 2 photon candidates in the ZDC, selected using the longitudinal shower profile. The ZDC energy scale was established using the endpoint measured in 7 TeV collision data. Since the shower energy is concurrently measured in the “pixel” coordinate readout channels this allows energy calibration to be established for these channels also. |  |
| For 7 TeV collision data taken prior to LHCf removal the first ZDC module is the so-called “Hadronic x,y” which has identical energy resolution to all of the other ZDC modules. The coordinate resolution, however, is inferior to that of the high resolution EM, installed 7/20/10. Nevertheless, the reconstructed mass resolution is found to be 30% at m=130 MeV. As is found in ongoing simulation of pi0 reconstruction within the full ATLAS framework (see ZDC simulation TWIKI), the pi0 width is completely dominated by the energy resolution. Therefore, the current state of ATLAS ZDC photon energy resolution can be inferred from this plot. |  |
| The Z vertex distribution from inner tracker vs. the time of arrival of showers in ZDC-C relative to the ATLAS clock calculated from waveform reconstruction using Shannon interpolation of 40 MegaSample/sec ATLAS data (readout via the ATLAS L1calo Pre-processor modules). Typical time resolution is ~200 psec per photomultiplier (see ATL-COM-LUM-2010-022). The two areas outside the main high intensity area are due to satellite bunches. Note that this plot also provides a more precise calibration of the ZDC timing (here shown using the ZDC timing algorithm not corrected for the digitizer non-linearity discussed in ATL-COM-LUM-2010-027). With the non-linearity correction the upper and lower satellite separations are equalized. |  |
| In this Figure amplitude signals are shown for the A side of the ATLAS ZDCs for Pb-Pb collisions at √sNN=2.76 TeV. The three visible enhancements correspond to one, two, and three-neutron measurements, where each neutron has 1.38 TeV. No trigger requirements were applied. The similarity between the two sides suggests the detectors have well-balanced gains and thresholds. These events are relevant for studying heavy ion collisions and ultra-peripheral collisions, which proceed through the Lorentz-contracted Coulomb fields of the nuclei. These plots comes from the analysis of about 5 million events from RUN 169136 |  |
| Same as above for side C |  |
| In this figure is shown for Pb-Pb collisions at √sNN=2.76 TeV the correlation between the total transverse energy deposited in ATLAS calorimeters and the amplitude signal from the ATLAS Zero-Degree Calorimeters. The correlation seen corresponds to the interplay between hadronic interations of the colliding nuclei and Coulomb interactions of the colliding nuclei in Ultra-Peripheral Collisions (UPC). For low ET, the events come primarily from the UPC through exchange of one or more photons, exciting one or both nuclei, which subsequently de-excite through neutron emission, the neutrons continuing in the forward direction. For these reactions, the number of neutrons impacting the ZDC can be large, e.g., up to several dozen neutrons; in this plot, up to ~10 neutrons are seen. In this case, little energy is deposited in the rest of ATLAS. Signals with large ET indicate hadronic interactions of the nuclei, which cause deposits of energy in the rest of ATLAS that can be very large (exceeding 12 TeV in this plot). Peripheral collisions involving hadronic interactions (in distinction to the Coulomb-only interactions) occur at smaller values of ET and these also deposit large numbers of neutrons in the ZDC. This is because most of the nucleons in the nucleus continue to move forward with nearly the same energy as before the collision, as quasi-spectators of the collision. More central hadronic collisions tend to have many fewer spectators, leaving little in the way of forward-going nuclear fragments, thus the energy deposition in the ZDC decreases as ET increases. |  |
| Energy distribution measured by the ZDC-C for photon candidates in pp collisions at 7 TeV, for run 177531, 177540, 177593 and 177682. Photon candidates are defined using the longitudinal shower development, by selecting events with energy deposition only in the first module. The energy scale is set using the π0 mass peak. The black curve represents all the photon candidates in the MinBias stream, the red curve is for events triggered by L1_ZDC_C. |  |
| Invariant mass of π0 candidates for pp collisions at 7 TeV, run n 177531, 177540, 177593 and 177682, reconstructed using the ZDC-C. The invariant mass resolution is found to be around 18%. The two photons are reconstructed as separate energy depositions on the first ZDC module (EM module). The distribution is fitted using the sum of a gaussian distribution for the main π0 peak and a Polinomial of third degree distribution for the background events, whose contribution is shown by the black curve. |  |
| Energy distribution of π0 candidates reconstructed in the ZDC-C for pp collisions at 7 TeV, run n 177531, 177540, 177593 and 177682. Photon candidates are defined using the longitudinal shower development, by selecting events with energy deposition only in the first module. |  |
Photos and drawings
Photos and drawings of the forward detectors can be found in the web page of the luminosity taskforce.Test beam and Monte Carlo Plots
Luminosity plots
Links
Responsible
Responsible: Michael Rijssenbeek
Last reviewed by: The plots have been reviewed by the ATLAS collaboration
| I | Attachment | History | Action | Size | Date | Who | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 jpg |
1a.jpg | r1 | manage | 19.5 K | 2011-08-29 - 18:14 | MarcoBruschi | |
 pdf |
1a.pdf | r1 | manage | 163.9 K | 2011-08-29 - 18:24 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
1b.jpg | r1 | manage | 19.6 K | 2011-08-29 - 18:15 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
1b.pdf | r1 | manage | 161.1 K | 2011-08-29 - 18:25 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
2022sumLumiByDayAfp.pdf | r1 | manage | 3.4 K | 2022-11-30 - 09:44 | MaciejTrzebinski | 2022 AFP Lumi |
 png |
2022sumLumiByDayAfp.png | r1 | manage | 22.4 K | 2022-11-30 - 09:44 | MaciejTrzebinski | 2022 AFP Lumi |
| jpg |
2a.jpg | r1 | manage | 15.7 K | 2011-08-29 - 18:15 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
2a.pdf | r1 | manage | 116.7 K | 2011-08-30 - 12:43 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
2b.jpg | r1 | manage | 15.7 K | 2011-08-29 - 18:16 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
2b.pdf | r1 | manage | 114.5 K | 2011-08-30 - 12:43 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
3.jpg | r2 r1 | manage | 7.9 K | 2011-08-30 - 16:48 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
3.pdf | r2 r1 | manage | 104.3 K | 2011-08-30 - 16:48 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
4a.jpg | r1 | manage | 15.5 K | 2011-08-29 - 18:16 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
4a.pdf | r1 | manage | 73.2 K | 2011-08-30 - 12:46 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
4b.jpg | r1 | manage | 17.5 K | 2011-08-29 - 18:17 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
4b.pdf | r1 | manage | 113.8 K | 2011-08-30 - 12:47 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run427929_alignment_alpha_C_FAR.pdf | r1 | manage | 15.6 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:15 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run427929_alignment_alpha_C_FAR.png | r1 | manage | 67.4 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:15 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 performance |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run427929_alignment_deltax_C_FAR.pdf | r1 | manage | 15.6 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:15 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run427929_alignment_deltax_C_FAR.png | r1 | manage | 73.0 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:15 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 performance |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run427929_alignment_deltay_C_FAR.pdf | r1 | manage | 15.6 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:15 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run427929_alignment_deltay_C_FAR.png | r1 | manage | 68.3 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:15 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 performance |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run427929_alignment_x_C_FAR.pdf | r1 | manage | 15.4 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:15 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run427929_alignment_x_C_FAR.png | r1 | manage | 69.3 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:15 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 performance |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run427929_alignment_y_C_FAR.pdf | r1 | manage | 15.3 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:15 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run427929_alignment_y_C_FAR.png | r1 | manage | 65.5 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:15 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 performance |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run427929_cluster_multiplicity_C_FAR.pdf | r1 | manage | 15.8 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:16 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run427929_cluster_multiplicity_C_FAR.png | r1 | manage | 63.7 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:16 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run427929_hit_multiplicity_C_FAR.pdf | r1 | manage | 15.8 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:16 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run427929_hit_multiplicity_C_FAR.png | r1 | manage | 62.3 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:16 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run427929_hitmap_row_vs_col_C_FAR_P1.pdf | r1 | manage | 108.1 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:16 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run427929_hitmap_row_vs_col_C_FAR_P1.png | r1 | manage | 370.0 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:16 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run427929_hitmap_row_vs_col_C_FAR_P1_cleaning_cuts.pdf | r1 | manage | 39.7 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:16 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run427929_hitmap_row_vs_col_C_FAR_P1_cleaning_cuts.png | r1 | manage | 165.7 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:16 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run427929_track_hitmap_A_FAR.pdf | r1 | manage | 42.8 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:16 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run427929_track_hitmap_A_FAR.png | r1 | manage | 200.1 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:16 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run427929_track_hitmap_A_NEAR.pdf | r1 | manage | 39.9 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:17 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run427929_track_hitmap_A_NEAR.png | r1 | manage | 193.8 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:17 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run427929_track_hitmap_C_FAR.pdf | r1 | manage | 45.5 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:17 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run427929_track_hitmap_C_FAR.png | r1 | manage | 227.9 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:17 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run427929_track_hitmap_C_NEAR.pdf | r1 | manage | 41.6 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:17 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run427929_track_hitmap_C_NEAR.png | r1 | manage | 210.0 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:17 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run427929_xAFP_vs_ATLAS_Ecalo.pdf | r1 | manage | 18.9 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:17 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run427929_xAFP_vs_ATLAS_Ecalo.png | r1 | manage | 51.7 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:17 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run427929_xAFP_vs_ATLAS_ID.pdf | r1 | manage | 18.7 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:17 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run427929_xAFP_vs_ATLAS_ID.png | r1 | manage | 47.1 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:17 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run427929_xAlignment_vs_yAFP.pdf | r1 | manage | 16.5 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:18 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run427929_xAlignment_vs_yAFP.png | r1 | manage | 89.3 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:18 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run429142_xAFP_vs_ToFTrain_A.pdf | r1 | manage | 21.5 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:18 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run429142_xAFP_vs_ToFTrain_A.png | r1 | manage | 95.3 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:18 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run429142_xAFP_vs_ToFTrain_C.pdf | r1 | manage | 20.9 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:18 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run429142_xAFP_vs_ToFTrain_C.png | r1 | manage | 94.8 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:18 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| pdf |
AFP_2022_run432180_NtrkAFP_vs_BCID.pdf | r1 | manage | 26.1 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:18 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| png |
AFP_2022_run432180_NtrkAFP_vs_BCID.png | r1 | manage | 55.8 K | 2022-09-13 - 19:18 | MaciejTrzebinski | AFP 2022 Performance |
| pdf |
AFP_hitmap_pilot_beam_2021.pdf | r1 | manage | 132.4 K | 2021-12-15 - 09:02 | MaciejTrzebinski | ARP - pilot beam 2021 |
| png |
AFP_hitmap_pilot_beam_2021.png | r1 | manage | 74.4 K | 2021-12-15 - 09:02 | MaciejTrzebinski | ARP - pilot beam 2021 |
| jpg |
AFP_st0.jpg | r1 | manage | 37.5 K | 2014-05-14 - 16:08 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
AFP_st0.pdf | r1 | manage | 28.1 K | 2014-05-13 - 15:52 | MateuszDyndal | |
| jpg |
AFP_st0NTrk_mu.jpg | r1 | manage | 18.8 K | 2014-05-14 - 16:08 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
AFP_st0NTrk_mu.pdf | r1 | manage | 14.8 K | 2014-05-13 - 15:54 | MateuszDyndal | |
| jpg |
AFP_st0XiEff1_mu.jpg | r1 | manage | 19.7 K | 2014-05-14 - 16:08 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
AFP_st0XiEff1_mu.pdf | r1 | manage | 17.7 K | 2014-05-13 - 15:55 | MateuszDyndal | |
| jpg |
AFP_st0_trk2.jpg | r1 | manage | 24.5 K | 2014-05-14 - 16:08 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
AFP_st0_trk2.pdf | r1 | manage | 21.9 K | 2014-05-13 - 15:54 | MateuszDyndal | |
| jpg |
AFP_st0resX.jpg | r1 | manage | 16.1 K | 2014-05-14 - 16:08 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
AFP_st0resX.pdf | r1 | manage | 14.0 K | 2014-05-13 - 15:54 | MateuszDyndal | |
| jpg |
AFP_st1NTrk_mu.jpg | r1 | manage | 17.1 K | 2014-05-14 - 16:08 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
AFP_st1NTrk_mu.pdf | r1 | manage | 14.6 K | 2014-05-13 - 15:55 | MateuszDyndal | |
| jpg |
AFPsc1.jpg | r1 | manage | 17.1 K | 2014-05-14 - 16:08 | MarcoBruschi | |
| png |
AFPsc1.png | r1 | manage | 24.2 K | 2014-05-13 - 15:53 | MateuszDyndal | |
| jpg |
AFPscheme.jpg | r1 | manage | 81.9 K | 2014-05-13 - 15:49 | MateuszDyndal | |
| jpg |
AFPscheme1.jpg | r1 | manage | 8.9 K | 2014-05-14 - 16:08 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
ALFA_EventDisplay_Run191373_Event1057837_copy.jpg | r1 | manage | 18.8 K | 2012-06-27 - 16:23 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
ALFA_EventDisplay_Run191373_Event1057837_copy.pdf | r1 | manage | 234.7 K | 2012-06-27 - 16:23 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
ALFA_EventDisplay_Run191373_Event300005_copy.jpg | r1 | manage | 18.5 K | 2012-06-27 - 16:23 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
ALFA_EventDisplay_Run191373_Event300005_copy.pdf | r1 | manage | 232.8 K | 2012-06-27 - 16:23 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
ALFA_EventDisplay_Run191373_Event5033115_copy.jpg | r1 | manage | 19.6 K | 2012-06-27 - 16:23 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
ALFA_EventDisplay_Run191373_Event5033115_copy.pdf | r1 | manage | 237.9 K | 2012-06-27 - 16:23 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
ALFA_EventDisplay_Run191373_Event714083_copy.jpg | r1 | manage | 19.2 K | 2012-06-27 - 16:23 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
ALFA_EventDisplay_Run191373_Event714083_copy.pdf | r1 | manage | 235.7 K | 2012-06-27 - 16:23 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
ALFA_Figure_2.jpg | r1 | manage | 9.2 K | 2011-05-04 - 12:49 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
ALFA_Figure_2.pdf | r1 | manage | 28.5 K | 2011-05-04 - 12:51 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
ALFA_Figure_3.jpg | r1 | manage | 12.9 K | 2011-05-04 - 12:57 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
ALFA_Figure_3.pdf | r1 | manage | 88.1 K | 2011-05-04 - 12:58 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
ALFA_Figure_4.jpg | r1 | manage | 12.6 K | 2011-05-04 - 13:07 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
ALFA_Figure_4.pdf | r1 | manage | 85.9 K | 2011-05-04 - 13:08 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
ALFA_PMT_pilot_beam_2021.pdf | r1 | manage | 21.3 K | 2021-12-15 - 09:02 | MaciejTrzebinski | ARP - pilot beam 2021 |
| png |
ALFA_PMT_pilot_beam_2021.png | r1 | manage | 39.5 K | 2021-12-15 - 09:02 | MaciejTrzebinski | ARP - pilot beam 2021 |
| jpg |
ALFA_figure_1.jpg | r1 | manage | 9.1 K | 2011-05-04 - 12:18 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
ALFA_figure_1.pdf | r1 | manage | 31.1 K | 2011-05-04 - 12:18 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002_Prel_AFP_Side_A_Far.pdf | r1 | manage | 16.2 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:55 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002 |
| png |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002_Prel_AFP_Side_A_Far.png | r1 | manage | 93.9 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:55 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002 |
| pdf |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002_Prel_AFP_Side_A_Far_ev.pdf | r1 | manage | 16.1 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:55 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002 |
| png |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002_Prel_AFP_Side_A_Far_ev.png | r1 | manage | 93.5 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:55 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002 |
| pdf |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002_Prel_AFP_Side_A_Near.pdf | r1 | manage | 16.1 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:55 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002 |
| png |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002_Prel_AFP_Side_A_Near.png | r1 | manage | 93.9 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:55 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002 |
| pdf |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002_Prel_AFP_Side_A_Near_ev.pdf | r1 | manage | 16.1 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:55 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002 |
| png |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002_Prel_AFP_Side_A_Near_ev.png | r1 | manage | 93.7 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:55 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002 |
| pdf |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002_Prel_AFP_Side_C_Far.pdf | r1 | manage | 16.1 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:55 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002 |
| png |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002_Prel_AFP_Side_C_Far.png | r1 | manage | 94.7 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:55 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002 |
| pdf |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002_Prel_AFP_Side_C_Far_ev.pdf | r1 | manage | 16.1 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:55 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002 |
| png |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002_Prel_AFP_Side_C_Far_ev.png | r1 | manage | 94.1 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:55 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002 |
| pdf |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002_Prel_AFP_Side_C_Near.pdf | r1 | manage | 16.1 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:55 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002 |
| png |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002_Prel_AFP_Side_C_Near.png | r1 | manage | 94.1 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:55 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002 |
| pdf |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002_Prel_AFP_Side_C_Near_ev.pdf | r1 | manage | 16.0 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:55 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002 |
| png |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002_Prel_AFP_Side_C_Near_ev.png | r1 | manage | 93.8 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:55 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-002 |
| pdf |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011-fig1.pdf | r1 | manage | 27.6 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:29 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011 |
| png |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011-fig1.png | r1 | manage | 23.4 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:29 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011 |
| pdf |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011-fig2.pdf | r1 | manage | 39.4 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:29 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011 |
| png |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011-fig2.png | r1 | manage | 21.6 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:29 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011 |
| pdf |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011-fig3.pdf | r1 | manage | 23.5 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:29 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011 |
| png |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011-fig3.png | r1 | manage | 18.8 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:29 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011 |
| pdf |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011-fig4a.pdf | r1 | manage | 22.1 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:29 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011 |
| png |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011-fig4a.png | r1 | manage | 18.1 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:29 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011 |
| pdf |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011-fig4b.pdf | r1 | manage | 14.3 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:29 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011 |
| png |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011-fig4b.png | r1 | manage | 16.1 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:29 | MaciejTrzebinski | ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011 |
| pdf |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011-fig5.pdf | r1 | manage | 20.1 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:29 | MaciejTrzebinski | |
| png |
ATL-COM-FWD-2021-011-fig5.png | r1 | manage | 19.3 K | 2021-12-17 - 08:29 | MaciejTrzebinski | |
| jpg |
ATL-COM-LUM-2011-021.jpg | r1 | manage | 53.6 K | 2011-10-27 - 11:29 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
ATL-COM-LUM-2011-021.pdf | r2 r1 | manage | 58.8 K | 2011-10-27 - 11:36 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
ATL-COM-LUM-2011-021_T.jpg | r1 | manage | 12.8 K | 2011-10-27 - 11:29 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig1.pdf | r1 | manage | 28.8 K | 2016-05-31 - 19:46 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig10.pdf | r1 | manage | 52.4 K | 2016-05-31 - 19:46 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Fig10_tn.jpg | r1 | manage | 51.7 K | 2016-05-31 - 11:52 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig1_OV.pdf | r1 | manage | 14.3 K | 2015-10-20 - 21:37 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Fig1_tn.jpg | r1 | manage | 17.6 K | 2016-05-31 - 11:41 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig2.pdf | r1 | manage | 704.0 K | 2016-05-31 - 19:46 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Fig2_OV.jpg | r1 | manage | 25.2 K | 2015-10-20 - 21:38 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig2_OV.pdf | r1 | manage | 21.2 K | 2015-10-20 - 21:37 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Fig2_tn.jpg | r1 | manage | 55.0 K | 2016-05-31 - 11:38 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig3.pdf | r1 | manage | 21.3 K | 2016-05-31 - 19:46 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Fig3_OV.jpg | r1 | manage | 33.1 K | 2015-10-20 - 21:37 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig3_OV.pdf | r1 | manage | 16.2 K | 2015-10-20 - 21:37 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Fig3_tn.jpg | r1 | manage | 30.0 K | 2016-05-31 - 11:52 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig4.pdf | r1 | manage | 66.0 K | 2016-05-31 - 19:46 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Fig4_OV.jpg | r1 | manage | 16.5 K | 2015-10-20 - 21:37 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig4_OV.pdf | r1 | manage | 16.1 K | 2015-10-20 - 21:37 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Fig4_tn.jpg | r1 | manage | 52.6 K | 2016-05-31 - 11:52 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig5.pdf | r1 | manage | 833.5 K | 2016-05-31 - 19:46 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Fig5_OV.jpg | r1 | manage | 16.6 K | 2015-10-20 - 21:37 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig5_OV.pdf | r1 | manage | 16.6 K | 2015-10-20 - 21:37 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Fig5_tn.jpg | r1 | manage | 39.2 K | 2016-05-31 - 11:52 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig6.pdf | r1 | manage | 21.3 K | 2016-05-31 - 19:46 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Fig6_OV.jpg | r1 | manage | 8.5 K | 2015-10-20 - 21:34 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig6_OV.pdf | r1 | manage | 14.1 K | 2015-10-20 - 21:34 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Fig6_tn.jpg | r1 | manage | 29.1 K | 2016-05-31 - 11:52 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig7.pdf | r1 | manage | 36.6 K | 2016-05-31 - 19:46 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Fig7_OV.jpg | r1 | manage | 13.8 K | 2015-10-20 - 21:34 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig7_OV.pdf | r1 | manage | 72.3 K | 2015-10-20 - 21:34 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Fig7_tn.jpg | r1 | manage | 40.4 K | 2016-05-31 - 11:52 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig8.pdf | r1 | manage | 500.0 K | 2016-05-31 - 19:46 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Fig8_OV.jpg | r1 | manage | 14.7 K | 2015-10-20 - 21:34 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig8_OV.pdf | r1 | manage | 146.7 K | 2015-10-20 - 21:34 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Fig8_tn.jpg | r1 | manage | 56.1 K | 2016-05-31 - 11:52 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig9.pdf | r1 | manage | 21.3 K | 2016-05-31 - 19:46 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Fig9_OV.jpg | r2 r1 | manage | 13.9 K | 2015-10-21 - 22:17 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Fig9_OV.pdf | r2 r1 | manage | 215.0 K | 2015-10-21 - 22:17 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Fig9_tn.jpg | r1 | manage | 29.4 K | 2016-05-31 - 11:52 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
LHCC_MuLUCIDwitRATIOS.pdf | r1 | manage | 26.1 K | 2015-05-28 - 21:27 | MarcoBruschi | |
| png |
LUCID_Absolute.png | r1 | manage | 27.6 K | 2018-05-18 - 16:11 | AntonelloSbrizzi | HV applied to the PMTs as a function of cumulative luminosity delivered to the LHC from 2015 to 2017. |
| png |
LUCID_Bi107Signal.png | r1 | manage | 8.4 K | 2018-05-18 - 13:10 | AntonelloSbrizzi | Plot of a single pulse in a LUCID PMT from the Bi-207 source in 2017 |
| jpg |
LUCID_PinDiodeA.jpg | r1 | manage | 1821.6 K | 2018-06-01 - 16:17 | AntonelloSbrizzi | LED calibration signal as monitored by the PIN-diode as a function of time in 2016. |
| png |
LUCID_Relative.png | r1 | manage | 30.3 K | 2018-05-18 - 16:15 | AntonelloSbrizzi | HV applied to the PMTs as a function of integrated luminosity delivered from 2015-2017 for each year separately. |
| png |
LUCID_TransitTime.png | r1 | manage | 76.6 K | 2018-05-18 - 16:23 | AntonelloSbrizzi | Transit time as a function of HV. |
| png |
LUCID_meas.png | r1 | manage | 22.5 K | 2018-05-18 - 16:08 | AntonelloSbrizzi | Measurement of the pulseheight distribution of the LUCROD amplified signals from the Bi-source. |
| jpg |
LUCID_plotctoa2.jpg | r1 | manage | 362.7 K | 2018-05-18 - 16:25 | AntonelloSbrizzi | Charge-amplitude ratio as a function of day in 2016. |
| pdf |
LUCID_plots_v5.pdf | r1 | manage | 264.8 K | 2015-05-28 - 21:26 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
LUCID_preliminary_Page_1.jpg | r2 r1 | manage | 625.7 K | 2017-11-29 - 16:15 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
LUCID_preliminary_Page_1_copy.jpg | r1 | manage | 8.8 K | 2017-11-29 - 16:03 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
LUCID_preliminary_Page_2.jpg | r2 r1 | manage | 554.9 K | 2017-11-29 - 16:15 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
LUCID_preliminary_Page_2_copy.jpg | r1 | manage | 12.0 K | 2017-11-29 - 15:53 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
LUCID_preliminary_Page_3.jpg | r2 r1 | manage | 559.5 K | 2017-11-29 - 16:15 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
LUCID_preliminary_Page_3_copy.jpg | r1 | manage | 8.6 K | 2017-11-29 - 15:53 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
LUCID_preliminary_Page_4.jpg | r2 r1 | manage | 543.2 K | 2017-11-29 - 16:15 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
LUCID_preliminary_Page_4_copy.jpg | r1 | manage | 11.5 K | 2017-11-29 - 15:53 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
LUCID_preliminary_Page_5.jpg | r2 r1 | manage | 515.0 K | 2017-11-29 - 16:15 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
LUCID_preliminary_Page_5_copy.jpg | r1 | manage | 11.1 K | 2017-11-29 - 15:53 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
LUCID_preliminary_Page_6.jpg | r2 r1 | manage | 577.4 K | 2017-11-29 - 16:15 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
LUCID_preliminary_Page_6_copy.jpg | r1 | manage | 8.3 K | 2017-11-29 - 15:53 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
LUCID_preliminary_Page_7.jpg | r2 r1 | manage | 549.4 K | 2017-11-29 - 16:15 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
LUCID_preliminary_Page_7_copy.jpg | r1 | manage | 7.3 K | 2017-11-29 - 15:53 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
LUCID_preliminary_Page_8.jpg | r2 r1 | manage | 1197.8 K | 2017-11-29 - 16:15 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
LUCID_preliminary_Page_8_copy.jpg | r1 | manage | 9.9 K | 2017-11-29 - 15:53 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
LUCID_preliminary_Page_9.jpg | r2 r1 | manage | 727.7 K | 2017-11-29 - 16:15 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
LUCID_preliminary_Page_9_copy.jpg | r1 | manage | 7.6 K | 2017-11-29 - 15:53 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
LUCID_totalmean_bi_2016.pdf | r1 | manage | 22.8 K | 2018-05-18 - 16:18 | AntonelloSbrizzi | Variation in percent of the measured mean charge relative a reference run for one of the Bi-calibrated photomultipliers. |
| pdf |
NewLHCC_LUCIDOR_Fibers_PerBCID.pdf | r1 | manage | 29.2 K | 2015-05-28 - 21:26 | MarcoBruschi | |
| png |
Per_BCID_poster.PNG | r1 | manage | 30.5 K | 2015-05-21 - 17:37 | MarcoBruschi | Lucid Splash Events - RUN 2 |
| jpg |
Per_BCID_poster_red.jpg | r1 | manage | 26.4 K | 2015-05-21 - 17:49 | MarcoBruschi | |
| png |
Per_BCID_poster_zoomed.PNG | r1 | manage | 28.8 K | 2015-05-21 - 17:37 | MarcoBruschi | Lucid Splash Events - RUN 2 |
| jpg |
Per_BCID_poster_zoomed_red.jpg | r1 | manage | 25.8 K | 2015-05-21 - 17:49 | MarcoBruschi | |
| png |
Per_LB_poster.PNG | r1 | manage | 31.3 K | 2015-05-21 - 17:37 | MarcoBruschi | Lucid Splash Events - RUN 2 |
| jpg |
Per_LB_poster_red.jpg | r1 | manage | 25.3 K | 2015-05-21 - 17:49 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Picture1.jpg | r1 | manage | 12.0 K | 2011-11-08 - 14:04 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Picture1.pdf | r1 | manage | 150.3 K | 2011-11-08 - 14:06 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Picture2.jpg | r1 | manage | 11.5 K | 2011-11-08 - 14:04 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Picture2.pdf | r1 | manage | 127.4 K | 2011-11-08 - 14:06 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Picture3.jpg | r1 | manage | 12.4 K | 2011-11-08 - 14:05 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Picture3.pdf | r1 | manage | 204.7 K | 2011-11-08 - 14:06 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Picture4.jpg | r1 | manage | 8.1 K | 2011-11-08 - 14:05 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Picture4.pdf | r1 | manage | 122.8 K | 2011-11-08 - 14:07 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
Picture5.jpg | r1 | manage | 10.3 K | 2011-11-08 - 14:05 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Picture5.pdf | r1 | manage | 154.4 K | 2011-11-08 - 14:07 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
Signal.pdf | r1 | manage | 9.5 K | 2010-06-24 - 06:46 | VincentHedberg | |
| png |
ZDC-PilotBeam2021_1.png | r1 | manage | 109.8 K | 2022-04-05 - 15:52 | MichaelRijssenbeek | Approved Plots from the 2021 LHC Pilot Beam |
| png |
ZDC-PilotBeam2021_2.png | r1 | manage | 107.9 K | 2022-04-05 - 15:52 | MichaelRijssenbeek | Approved Plots from the 2021 LHC Pilot Beam |
| png |
ZDC-PilotBeam2021_3.png | r1 | manage | 102.4 K | 2022-04-05 - 15:52 | MichaelRijssenbeek | Approved Plots from the 2021 LHC Pilot Beam |
| png |
ZDC-PilotBeam2021_4.png | r1 | manage | 114.1 K | 2022-04-05 - 15:52 | MichaelRijssenbeek | Approved Plots from the 2021 LHC Pilot Beam |
| png |
ZDC-PilotBeam2021_5.png | r1 | manage | 110.1 K | 2022-04-05 - 15:52 | MichaelRijssenbeek | Approved Plots from the 2021 LHC Pilot Beam |
| png |
ZDC-PilotBeam2021_6.png | r1 | manage | 111.0 K | 2022-04-05 - 15:52 | MichaelRijssenbeek | Approved Plots from the 2021 LHC Pilot Beam |
| png |
ZDC-PilotBeam2021_7.png | r1 | manage | 109.7 K | 2022-04-05 - 15:52 | MichaelRijssenbeek | Approved Plots from the 2021 LHC Pilot Beam |
| png |
ZDC-PilotBeam2021_8.png | r1 | manage | 112.9 K | 2022-04-05 - 15:52 | MichaelRijssenbeek | Approved Plots from the 2021 LHC Pilot Beam |
| jpg |
alfa_fig1_230212.jpg | r2 r1 | manage | 10.6 K | 2012-02-23 - 14:03 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
alfa_fig1_230212.pdf | r1 | manage | 235.7 K | 2012-02-23 - 14:07 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
alfa_fig2_230212.jpg | r1 | manage | 9.9 K | 2012-02-23 - 14:02 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
alfa_fig2_230212.pdf | r1 | manage | 181.6 K | 2012-02-23 - 14:07 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
alfa_fig3_230212.jpg | r1 | manage | 8.5 K | 2012-02-23 - 14:02 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
alfa_fig3_230212.pdf | r1 | manage | 145.8 K | 2012-02-23 - 14:06 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
alfa_fig4_230212.jpg | r1 | manage | 8.0 K | 2012-02-23 - 14:02 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
alfa_fig4_230212.pdf | r1 | manage | 139.0 K | 2012-02-23 - 14:05 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
alfa_fig5_230212.jpg | r1 | manage | 6.3 K | 2012-02-23 - 14:01 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
alfa_fig5_230212.pdf | r1 | manage | 89.6 K | 2012-02-23 - 14:05 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
alfa_fig6_230212.jpg | r1 | manage | 6.4 K | 2012-02-23 - 14:01 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
alfa_fig6_230212.pdf | r1 | manage | 89.0 K | 2012-02-23 - 14:04 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
alfa_fig7_230212.jpg | r1 | manage | 6.4 K | 2012-02-23 - 14:00 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
alfa_fig7_230212.pdf | r1 | manage | 91.4 K | 2012-02-23 - 14:04 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
alfa_fig8_230212.jpg | r1 | manage | 6.3 K | 2012-02-23 - 13:59 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
alfa_fig8_230212.pdf | r1 | manage | 91.2 K | 2012-02-23 - 14:04 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
alfa_fig9_230212.jpg | r1 | manage | 7.5 K | 2012-02-23 - 13:59 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
alfa_fig9_230212.pdf | r1 | manage | 95.0 K | 2012-02-23 - 14:03 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
figure1.pdf | r1 | manage | 177.4 K | 2019-02-14 - 17:18 | MarcoBruschi | |
| png |
figure1.png | r2 r1 | manage | 111.2 K | 2019-02-14 - 17:12 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
figure1_th.jpg | r1 | manage | 17.0 K | 2019-02-14 - 16:47 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
figure2.pdf | r1 | manage | 164.0 K | 2019-02-14 - 17:18 | MarcoBruschi | |
| png |
figure2.png | r2 r1 | manage | 98.5 K | 2019-02-14 - 17:12 | MarcoBruschi | |
| png |
figure2_th.png | r1 | manage | 44.6 K | 2019-02-14 - 16:47 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
figure3.jpg | r2 r1 | manage | 941.6 K | 2019-02-14 - 17:12 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
figure3.pdf | r1 | manage | 945.7 K | 2019-02-14 - 17:18 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
figure3_th.jpg | r1 | manage | 28.7 K | 2019-02-14 - 16:47 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
figure4.pdf | r1 | manage | 66.9 K | 2019-02-14 - 17:18 | MarcoBruschi | |
| png |
figure4.png | r2 r1 | manage | 28.0 K | 2019-02-14 - 17:12 | MarcoBruschi | |
| png |
figure4_th.png | r1 | manage | 19.7 K | 2019-02-14 - 16:47 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
figure_approved.jpg | r1 | manage | 8.9 K | 2015-06-23 - 18:42 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
figure_approved.jpg.pdf | r1 | manage | 112.8 K | 2015-06-23 - 18:40 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
figure_approved.pdf | r1 | manage | 112.8 K | 2015-06-23 - 18:42 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
halorate_x.jpg | r1 | manage | 22.9 K | 2012-11-30 - 10:24 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
halorate_x.pdf | r1 | manage | 29.3 K | 2012-11-30 - 10:11 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
halorate_y.jpg | r1 | manage | 22.4 K | 2012-11-30 - 10:24 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
halorate_y.pdf | r1 | manage | 26.1 K | 2012-11-30 - 10:11 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
hit_log.pdf | r1 | manage | 18.5 K | 2010-06-24 - 06:42 | VincentHedberg | |
| jpg |
l_zdc1.jpg | r1 | manage | 38.8 K | 2012-08-22 - 18:52 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
l_zdc1.pdf | r1 | manage | 387.6 K | 2012-08-22 - 18:52 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
l_zdc2.jpg | r1 | manage | 41.3 K | 2012-08-22 - 18:52 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
l_zdc2.pdf | r1 | manage | 376.7 K | 2012-08-22 - 18:52 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
l_zdc3.jpg | r1 | manage | 41.2 K | 2012-08-22 - 18:52 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
l_zdc3.pdf | r1 | manage | 367.1 K | 2012-08-22 - 18:52 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
l_zdc4.jpg | r1 | manage | 43.1 K | 2012-08-22 - 18:52 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
l_zdc4.pdf | r1 | manage | 359.6 K | 2012-08-22 - 18:52 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
lucid_poster.jpg | r1 | manage | 15.1 K | 2013-03-15 - 13:06 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
lucid_poster.pdf | r1 | manage | 126.3 K | 2013-03-15 - 13:06 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
nominal_pilot_x.jpg | r1 | manage | 28.3 K | 2012-11-30 - 10:24 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
nominal_pilot_x.pdf | r1 | manage | 28.6 K | 2012-11-30 - 10:11 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
nominal_pilot_y.jpg | r1 | manage | 25.0 K | 2012-11-30 - 10:24 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
nominal_pilot_y.pdf | r1 | manage | 26.3 K | 2012-11-30 - 10:11 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
pilotrate_x.jpg | r1 | manage | 24.5 K | 2012-11-30 - 10:24 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
pilotrate_x.pdf | r1 | manage | 29.5 K | 2012-11-30 - 10:11 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
pilotrate_y.jpg | r1 | manage | 24.2 K | 2012-11-30 - 10:24 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
pilotrate_y.pdf | r1 | manage | 26.1 K | 2012-11-30 - 10:11 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
pulseh.pdf | r1 | manage | 140.6 K | 2015-05-28 - 21:26 | MarcoBruschi | |
| png |
sc1.png | r1 | manage | 24.2 K | 2014-05-13 - 15:51 | MateuszDyndal | |
| pdf |
st0.pdf | r1 | manage | 28.1 K | 2014-05-13 - 15:51 | MateuszDyndal | |
| jpg |
sumLumiByDayAfp.jpg | r1 | manage | 16.0 K | 2018-12-10 - 17:11 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
sumLumiByDayAfp.pdf | r1 | manage | 20.1 K | 2018-12-10 - 17:11 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
zdc-sm-1.jpg | r1 | manage | 14.1 K | 2012-06-09 - 14:49 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
zdc-sm-1.pdf | r1 | manage | 30.8 K | 2012-06-09 - 14:49 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
zdc-sm-2.jpg | r1 | manage | 16.0 K | 2012-06-09 - 14:49 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
zdc-sm-2.pdf | r1 | manage | 29.1 K | 2012-06-09 - 14:49 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
zdc-sm-3.jpg | r1 | manage | 15.6 K | 2012-06-09 - 14:49 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
zdc-sm-3.pdf | r1 | manage | 30.2 K | 2012-06-09 - 14:49 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
zdc10.jpg | r1 | manage | 9.3 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:10 | VincentHedberg | |
| pdf |
zdc10.pdf | r1 | manage | 181.1 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:11 | VincentHedberg | |
| jpg |
zdc11.jpg | r1 | manage | 8.9 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:11 | VincentHedberg | |
| pdf |
zdc11.pdf | r1 | manage | 169.4 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:11 | VincentHedberg | |
| jpg |
zdc12.jpg | r1 | manage | 185.7 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:11 | VincentHedberg | |
| jpg |
zdc12s.jpg | r1 | manage | 9.5 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:11 | VincentHedberg | |
| jpg |
zdc13.jpg | r1 | manage | 9.3 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:12 | VincentHedberg | |
| pdf |
zdc13.pdf | r1 | manage | 173.3 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:12 | VincentHedberg | |
| jpg |
zdc2.jpg | r1 | manage | 10.8 K | 2010-07-12 - 11:23 | VincentHedberg | |
| pdf |
zdc2.pdf | r1 | manage | 1013.2 K | 2010-07-12 - 11:24 | VincentHedberg | |
| jpg |
zdc3.jpg | r1 | manage | 11.2 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:08 | VincentHedberg | |
| pdf |
zdc3.pdf | r1 | manage | 1047.1 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:08 | VincentHedberg | |
| jpg |
zdc4.jpg | r1 | manage | 11.3 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:08 | VincentHedberg | |
| pdf |
zdc4.pdf | r1 | manage | 1052.6 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:08 | VincentHedberg | |
| jpg |
zdc5.jpg | r1 | manage | 13.1 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:08 | VincentHedberg | |
| pdf |
zdc5.pdf | r1 | manage | 285.7 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:09 | VincentHedberg | |
| jpg |
zdc6.jpg | r1 | manage | 14.1 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:09 | VincentHedberg | |
| pdf |
zdc6.pdf | r1 | manage | 364.7 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:09 | VincentHedberg | |
| jpg |
zdc7.jpg | r1 | manage | 12.1 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:09 | VincentHedberg | |
| pdf |
zdc7.pdf | r1 | manage | 287.7 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:09 | VincentHedberg | |
| jpg |
zdc8.jpg | r1 | manage | 12.9 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:10 | VincentHedberg | |
| pdf |
zdc8.pdf | r1 | manage | 309.4 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:10 | VincentHedberg | |
| jpg |
zdc9.jpg | r1 | manage | 10.6 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:10 | VincentHedberg | |
| pdf |
zdc9.pdf | r1 | manage | 1042.5 K | 2010-07-12 - 16:10 | VincentHedberg | |
| jpg |
zdc_correlations.jpg | r1 | manage | 13.5 K | 2011-07-22 - 20:42 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
zdc_correlations.pdf | r1 | manage | 262.9 K | 2011-07-22 - 20:34 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
zdc_neutrons_a.jpg | r1 | manage | 7.7 K | 2011-07-22 - 20:37 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
zdc_neutrons_a.pdf | r1 | manage | 30.3 K | 2011-07-22 - 20:33 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
zdc_neutrons_c.jpg | r1 | manage | 7.8 K | 2011-07-22 - 20:41 | MarcoBruschi | |
| pdf |
zdc_neutrons_c.pdf | r1 | manage | 29.8 K | 2011-07-22 - 20:33 | MarcoBruschi | |
| jpg |
zdc_photon_energy.jpg | r1 | manage | 13.8 K | 2010-09-13 - 17:51 | VincentHedberg | |
| pdf |
zdc_photon_energy.pdf | r1 | manage | 110.5 K | 2010-09-13 - 17:51 | VincentHedberg | |
| jpg |
zdc_pi0.jpg | r1 | manage | 15.9 K | 2010-09-13 - 17:52 | VincentHedberg | |
| pdf |
zdc_pi0.pdf | r1 | manage | 79.6 K | 2010-09-13 - 17:52 | VincentHedberg | |
| jpg |
zdc_vx_time.jpg | r1 | manage | 15.1 K | 2010-09-13 - 17:52 | VincentHedberg | |
| pdf |
zdc_vx_time.pdf | r1 | manage | 68.1 K | 2010-09-13 - 17:52 | VincentHedberg |
Topic revision: r67 - 2022-11-30 - MaciejTrzebinski
ATLAS 
Internal TWiki
Changes
Notifications
RSS Feed
Account 
Copyright &© 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