ePIC AC-LGAD TOF DSC Weekly Meeting
→
US/Eastern
https://bnl.zoomgov.com/j/1617546118?pwd=qNzxLqF8Q4Mj3RerAZdVSELzEgEQzV.1 (zoom link)
https://bnl.zoomgov.com/j/1617546118?pwd=qNzxLqF8Q4Mj3RerAZdVSELzEgEQzV.1
zoom link
,
Description
eic-projdet-tofpid-l@lists.bnl.gov
zoom link : https://bnl.zoomgov.com/j/1617546118?pwd=qNzxLqF8Q4Mj3RerAZdVSELzEgEQzV.1
Quick recap
The meeting focused on discussing the upcoming DAC review and simulation updates for the TOF (Time-of-Flight) detector. Simone Mazza led the discussion about the DAC presentation format, clarifying that the TOF consortium needed to decide whether to present as a single contribution or split into sensor-specific talks. Tommy presented a detailed position resolution study showing that current simulation results were worse than beam test performance, identifying that threshold settings and edge effects were key factors affecting resolution. The team discussed whether to tune simulations more closely to beam test results or establish conservative assumptions for tracking group requirements. Yubo shared acceptance studies comparing different TOF layouts, revealing significant acceptance losses in the new two-layer design, particularly at lower momentum values. The group agreed that further studies were needed to explore layout modifications and understand the impact of track curvature on detector coverage.
Next steps
- Simone Mazza: Send a follow-up email to Satoshi and Zambu regarding the DAC review presentation and initiate the discussion outside of the meeting.
- Simone Mazza: Update the agenda slides if Yubo cannot upload them.
- Tommy: Contact the beam test people (likely Satoshi) to obtain the realistic threshold value corresponding to the beam test conditions.
- Tommy: Implement the realistic threshold and charge sharing magnitude in the simulation based on the information from the beam test people.
- Tommy: Discuss with the tracking group to agree on a realistic, conservative position resolution number for the full system.
- Yubo: Continue the acceptance study for the three-layer BTOF layout and update the results.
- Yubo: Investigate the geometry accuracy of the simulation, possibly by joining the MetaMOS discussion.
- Kentaro: Write an email to Zambu and Satoshi regarding the background study for the TAIC meeting.
- Simone Mazza: Send out emails regarding the topics discussed in the meeting.
Summary
DAC Review Preparation Discussion and workshop
The team discussed preparations for an upcoming DAC review in a couple of weeks. Surabhi clarified that the TOF consortium needs to decide whether Satoshi will give an update on the BTOF or if a sensor-specific presentation should be included instead. Simone Mazza agreed to follow up with Satoshi and Zhang Bu about the decision, with Surabhi noting that a final answer needs to be provided to Rolf by Monday. The team discussed an upcoming meeting where DSCs will present how they addressed recommendations and comments from the last DAC and PDRs. **Simone Mazza** mentioned a proposed TOF workshop to be held every six months, potentially in March or October, though the location is still undecided.
Kentaro provided updates from the simulation team, including presentations on position resolution study by Tommy and Han, and an acceptance study by Yubo. The team also noted an upcoming TAIC meeting scheduled for October 5th, though background study updates were deferred due to the absence of the DSC combination leader.
TOF Resolution Study
Tommy presented a study on TOF resolution in simulation, comparing it to beam test data. He identified that the current simulation resolution is worse than the beam test result of 15 microns, and proposed two solutions: increasing the charge sharing magnitude to 90% and reducing the threshold to 600 eV. The group discussed the limitations of the simulation, including the lack of noise modeling and uncertainty about threshold values in real sensors. John suggested focusing on a conservative, realistic resolution number for the full system rather than trying to match the exact beam test performance, as achieving 15 microns resolution across the full barrel may not be realistic. The team discussed simulation results for a TOF (Time of Flight) detector, with Grigory suggesting using a particle gun to cross-check against test beam conditions. Tommy agreed to consult with the tracking group about implementing realistic beam test thresholds and converting noise levels to appropriate simulation parameters.
TOF Detector acceptance study
Yubo presented an acceptance study comparing different BTOF layouts, showing that the new two-layer design had lower acceptance rates than the current single-layer design, particularly at lower momentum values. The team agreed to investigate variations of the two-layer design and examine event displays to better understand the acceptance loss patterns.
There are minutes attached to this event.
Show them.