Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

classification update #576

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
May 31, 2017
Merged

classification update #576

merged 3 commits into from
May 31, 2017

Conversation

feigaodm
Copy link
Member

Mis-identification of single electron S2 signals as S1 signal is a big contribution for the Lone-S1 rate in the detector, and significantly affect the accidental coincidence background.

A dedicated cut was defined by @MAVJ to reduce the probability of mis-identification. Instead of putting this cut in lax stage, we'd like to modify the peak classification in pax stage instead, which motivates this PR.

A minor modification of original cut is done to have slightly better acceptance for high AFT S1s (events happening on the top part of the TPC). Efficiency of this cut should be estimated together with other pax efficiency loss, such as this note

@feigaodm feigaodm requested a review from JelleAalbers May 25, 2017 20:43
@pdeperio pdeperio added this to the v6.6.6 milestone May 25, 2017
@feigaodm feigaodm requested a review from MAVJ May 26, 2017 22:22
Copy link
Contributor

@MAVJ MAVJ left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It looks quite ok, a small but useful modification. Nice Fei.

@feigaodm feigaodm merged commit 2bbf2c4 into master May 31, 2017
@feigaodm feigaodm deleted the classification_update_0525 branch May 31, 2017 18:21
feigaodm added a commit to XENON1T/lax that referenced this pull request Jun 21, 2017
redundant since we added it in pax (XENON1T/pax#576)
@pdeperio
Copy link
Contributor

can you include more documentation (note or plot) showing the tuning you did here?

tunnell pushed a commit to XENON1T/lax that referenced this pull request Jun 23, 2017
* Created Lichen for Scienceun1. Updated AmBe FV. Created NG FV

* Removed repeated definition

* Fix for codacy errors

This should fix the style errors found here: https://www.codacy.com/app/weiyuehuan/lax/pullRequest?prid=694964

* Another codacy fix

Fix for remaining 3 errors here: https://www.codacy.com/app/tunnell/lax/pullRequest?prid=694950 . Hope this will fix all

* Update sciencerun1.py

Corrected wrong dependency of FiducialCylinder1T cut

* Update SR0 AmBe to correct values

* Update sciencerun1.py

* remove SingleElectronS2 cut

redundant since we added it in pax (XENON1T/pax#576)

* fix style

* Fix trailing whitespace

* Fix more lint whitespace issues
@MAVJ
Copy link
Contributor

MAVJ commented Jul 24, 2017

pax665_clasif_limit

That is how the boundary looks in PaxV6.6.5 (same procedure explained and used in https://xecluster.lngs.infn.it/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=xenon:xenon1t:analysis:firstresults:exploring_se_cut)

@pdeperio
Copy link
Contributor

This should be compared to "Cut v4_RvsAft" in Figure 2 of your note (which was used in SR0 lax)? But then they look very similar, i.e. shouldn't the curve drop from AFT 0.4 to 0.5 according to this PR?

self.s1_rise_time_aft = interpolate.interp1d([0, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.70, 0.70, 1.0],
                                             [70, 70, 65, 60, 35, 0, 0], kind='linear')

Can you overlay the two?

And then how about a plot of the change in s1_rise_time_bound?

@pdeperio
Copy link
Contributor

pdeperio commented Sep 15, 2017

@feigaodm @MAVJ ping!

@jhowl01 just pointed out that this has changed again in pax_v6.8.0:

        self.s1_rise_time_bound = interpolate.interp1d([0, 5, 10, 100],
                                                       [80, 75, 70, 70],
                                                       fill_value='extrapolate', kind='linear')
        self.s1_rise_time_aft = interpolate.interp1d([0, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.70, 0.70, 1.0],
                                                     [70, 70, 68, 65, 60, 0, 0], kind='linear')

Can we please get more documentation on this, i.e. the overlay plot requested above?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants