# Presentation: 242694

## Study of the QIE Response & Calibration(Current Injection Mode) @ CalDet & Development of diagnostic tools for NearDet

- N.Saoulidou, Fermilab, CalDet meeting 03-12-04

- N. Saoulidou, Fermilab

## Outline

- Brief overview of Near Cal Check Runs
- Study  the behavior of the RMS of the QIE response in the Near Cal Check runs
- Define “pathologies”.
- Find “bad” Channels.
- Calculate the percentage of “bad” channels.
- Study the behavior of the MEAN of the QIE response in Near Cal Check runs.
- Establish a “stability” criterion.
- Find “unstable” channels.
- Calculate the percentage of “unstable” channels
- Discuss diagnostic tools for ND electronics developed from this analysis
- Conclusion – On going work

- N. Saoulidou, Fermilab

## Near Cal Check Runs

**Q****in**

**Response        (ADC counts)**

-      In the Near Cal Check Runs the DAC is swept through a range of values ( 37 in total which correspond in ~ 5 points for each different QIE range) and the QIE response  (in ADC counts) is calculated using the previously loaded Look-Up-Tables.
-    This way both the QIE Calibration and the QIE response characteristics can be examined.

- N. Saoulidou, Fermilab

## Study  the behavior the QIE response in  Near Cal Check runs : Define Pathologies 

**Rms : **
**Definition of “bad” channels** : rms greater than maximum in at least 8 of the 37 different DAC values.
**Definition of “suspicious” channels** : rms greater than maximum in any of the 37 different DAC values.
**Linearity : **
**Definition of “bad” channels** :  Chi-square of the fit (mean vs dacval )  > 10.
**Entries :**** **
**Definition of “bad” channels: **Missing entries for each QIE calibration point (256 in total 64 for each CAPID).
**Calibration Points  : **
**Definition of “bad” channels : **Missing some of the 37 different calibration points
**Mean vs Time: **
- Mean fluctuating more than 3*RMS, which corresponds to changes of the mean of ~ 3 %

- N. Saoulidou, Fermilab

## Behavior of “bad” channels (large RMS)  as a function of time 

- Channels that have large rms values for nearly all 37 DAC values are divided into two categories:
- (A) Channels with large rms’s in the great majority of processed Near Cal Check Runs
- (B) Channels that have perfectly normal rms’s for a period of runs, jump to large values for a few others and then return again to their normal behavior.

**Red dots: rms vs run, range 4 strip 23 plane 58**   **Blue dots: rms vs run,range 4 strip 15 plane 15**

**Red dots: rms vs run, range 4 strip 11 plane 7**   **Blue dots: rms vs run,range 4 strip 15 plane 15**

- N. Saoulidou, Fermilab

## Channels with large RMS in the 122 processed Near Cal Check Runs

**Channels with large RMS in the 122 processed Near Cal Check Runs**

- Studied **in detail** , and obtained **quantitative **information for all CalDet channels
- For each channel I calculated :
**(A)** The percentage (%) of large RMS ‘s for all 122 runs and all DAC values
**(B)** The highest percentage (%) of DAC values with large RMS’s  in the same run for all 122 runs.

- In nearly all channels there are cases with large RMS values, but the percentage of such cases is relatively low : **< 1 % for each channel**
- In nearly all channels (except of the previously discussed 2 bad channels)  the percentage of large RMS in different DAC values of the same run is again relatively low : **<  10 % for each channel,  which means a large RMS in maximum  4 out of the 37 DAC values**.

**(A)**

**(B)**

- Channel #

- Channel #

- N. Saoulidou, Fermilab

## Channels with Missing entries  in the 122 processed Near Cal Check Runs

- Two channels appear to have missing entries in the same run 80233 (strip 18 plane 48 has  14/256 entries and strip 21 plane 50 has  255/256 both for DAC value 29498).

**Menu**

**Minder slot **

- N. Saoulidou, Fermilab

## Channels with deviations from linearity  in the 122 processed Near Cal Check Runs

- 10 channels appear to have large Chi-squares in the same run 80233 (due to problems again with DAC value 29498)

- N. Saoulidou, Fermilab

## Summary of the study related with large QIE pathologies in Near Cal Check Runs 

- “Bad“  Channels :
- Large RMS in ~all 37 DAC values       : 2/1357**    0.15 % **
- Missing entries                          : 2/1357     **0.15  %   **Not the same channels as above
- Missing Calibration points                   : 0 /1357
- Deviation from linearity              : 12/1357     **0.9 %** (including some of the above “pathological” channels)

- N. Saoulidou, Fermilab

## Study  the behavior of the MEAN of the QIE response in Near Cal Check runs : Define pathologies 2.

***	****** *****1   <|MEAN-<MEAN>|< 2 **
**    ****2   <|MEAN-<MEAN>|< 3     **
**          ****|MEAN-<MEAN>|> 3***** ***
***       *****= The mean RMS for each DAC value**** **
- Changes of the MEAN QIE response > 1     ( 2    ) correspond to the following % change of the MEAN value:
** **
**    **

| DAC value     | Change % |
| --- | --- |
| 9 | 6.0 (12.0) |
| 57 | 4.0 (8.0) |
| 112 | 2.8 (5.6) |
| 175 | 2.0 (4.0) |
| 248 | 3.2 (6.4) |
| 332 | 2.0 (4.0) |
| 429 | 1.6 (3.2) |
| 541 | 1.2 (2.4) |
| 670 | 1.0 (2.0) |
| 819 | 1.4 (2.8) |

| DAC value     | Change % |
| --- | --- |
| 991 | 1.2 (2.4) |
| 1189 | 1.0 (2.0) |
| 1417 | 1.0 (2.0) |
| 1681 | 0.8 (1.6) |
| 1984 | 0.6 (1.2) |
| 2335 | 1.0 (2.0) |
| 2739 | 0.8 (1.6) |
| 3205 | 0.8 (1.6) |
| 3742 | 0.6 (1.2) |
| 4362 | 0.6 (1.2) |

| DAC value     | Change % |
| --- | --- |
| 5078 | 0.8 (1.6) |
| 5902 | 0.8 (1.6) |
| 6854 | 0.6 (1.2) |
| 7951 | 0.6 (1.2) |
| 9216 | 0.6 (1.2) |
| 10676 | 0.8 (1.6) |
| 12359 | 0.8 (1.6) |
| 14300 | 0.6 (1.2) |
| 16539 | 0.6 (1.2) |
| 19122 | 0.6 (1.2) |

| DAC value     | Change % |
| --- | --- |
| 22100 | 1.0 (2.0) |
| 25535 | 0.8 (1.6) |
| 29498 | 0.8 (1.6) |
| 34067 | 0.6 (1.2) |
| 39338 | 0.6 (1.2) |
| 45417 | 0.6 (1.2) |
| 52428 | 0.6 (1.2) |
|  |  |
|  |  |
|  |  |

- N. Saoulidou, Fermilab

## Time stability of the QIE response in Near Cal Check runs in cases with large RMS 

**Time stability of the QIE response in Near Cal Check runs in cases with large RMS **

- In all cases with a large RMS the MEAN value is affected as well.
- Due to lack of the actual data of the QIE response ( the only available information for these runs is the MEAN and the RMS), I can only make hypothetical assumptions on the behavior of the actual QIE response :
- The large RMS is not due to the QIE response distribution getting broader (that would not have affected the MEAN ).
- The unknown “activity” that results in a large RMS does not have a preferable direction (the MEAN is shifting both to lower and higher values)
**MEAN vs RUN (time) (strip 23 &  plane 58 DAC value 5902)**

**Normal RMS**

**Large RMS**

- N. Saoulidou, Fermilab

##   Time stability of the QIE response in NCC runs cont’d.

**  ****Time stability of the QIE response in NCC runs cont’d.**

-  If  I define as **“bad”** channels (with respect to the MEAN)  the ones where the MEAN is changing more than 1 sigma in at least 8 out of the 37 different DAC values  then their percentage is :  **3.0 %**

- Channel #

- 1   <mean

- N. Saoulidou, Fermilab

##   Time stability of the QIE response in NCC runs and QIE  Calibration

- So far the changes found in the MEAN QIE response are of the order of ~ 1 – 3 % and only 3.0 % of the ND channels show that behavior for more than 8 different DAC values.
- I didn’t find so far any significant MEAN variations that would indicate that a more often Calibration is needed (the data I have used so far correspond to 7 days between two QIE Calibrations)
**However, during the ND installation and commissioning phase a continuous study of the behavior of the QIE response would be necessary  to verify/examine this result....**

- N. Saoulidou, Fermilab

## “Bad” channels in CalDet : How I found them 

- Modified the QieCalibration Module (that is reading the summary table information), by including all my analysis that was in a form of macros in order to generate  5 text files :
**bad_channels_rmsxx.dat         Large RMS in most 37 DAC values        **
**suspicious_channels_xx.dat      Large RMS anywhere**
**bad_channels_chisqxx.dat       Large chi-square **
**bad_channels_entriesxx.dat     Missing Entries **
**bad_channels_dataxx.dat        Missing Calibration Points **
- These files contain :
- master
- minder channel
- master channel
- crate
- module
- Strip & Plane
- DAC value
**PATHOLOGY RELATED INFO (rms, chi-square, entries, calibration points)**

- N. Saoulidou, Fermilab

## Implementation @ the New Muon Lab:Example of a particularly “Bad” channel from a NCC Run @ NM

- This particular channel was flagged as “bad” by examining the info in the output text files. It appeared in nearly all text files as having :
- Large chi-square
- Missing entries
- Missing data points

- Mean vs DAC value

- N. Saoulidou, Fermilab

## Example of “Bad” channels from a NCC Run @ : Graphical Display 

-  Example of plots that it would be useful to be included, for each Minder Crate, in the Online Monitoring under a QIE Check Calibration  folder.

- Minder Slot

- Menu

- Minder Slot

- Menu

- Minder Slot

- Menu

- Large RMS

- Missing Entries

- Missing Data

- N. Saoulidou, Fermilab

## Summary & on going work

- The study of the QIE response in Near Cal Check runs revealed potential “pathologies” related with large rms’s, deviations from the linear behavior, and other calibration (or QIE response) pathologies.
- 122 NCC Runs from CalDet have already been checked and only a tiny fraction of the ND channels (2/1357 channels) shows problems with large Rms's, missing entries (2/1357 for a particular run), and deviations from linearity (12/1357 for a particular run).
- The development of these diagnostic tools for CalDet applies for the ND running as well and is already used at the 9 Plane Integration Test @ the New Muon Lab.
- It would be useful if these plots can be included in the ND online monitoring for each ND minder crate, in order to have while running an overall picture of the Detector electronics.

- N. Saoulidou, Fermilab