A measurement of the calorimeter response to single hadrons and determination of the jet energy scale uncertainty using LHC Run-1 pp-collision data with the ATLAS detector

Aaboud, M.; Barnovska-Blenessy, Z.; Berger, N.; Delmastro, M.; Ciaccio, L. Di; Elles, S.; Grevtsov, K.; Guillemin, T.; Hrynʼova, T.; Jézéquel, S.; Koletsou, I.; Lafaye, R.; Levêque, J.; Mastrandea, P.; Sauvage, G.; Sauvan, E.; Smart, B. H.; Todorov, T.; Wingerter-Seez, I.; Yatsenko, E.; Albrand, S.; Berlendis, S.; Camincher, C.; Collot, J.; Cŕéṕe-Renaudin, S.; Delsart, P. A.; Gabaldon, C.; Genest, M. H.; Gradin, P. O. J.; Hostachy, J-Y.; Ledroit-Guillon, F.; Lléres, A.; Lucotte, A.; Malek, F.; Petit, E.; Stark, J.; Trocmé, B.; Wu, M.; Rahal, G.; Aad, G.; Alstaty, M. I.; Barbero, M.; Calandri, A.; Calvet, T. P.; Coadou, Y.; Diaconu, C.; Diglio, S.; Djama, F.; Ellajosyula, V.; Feligioni, L.; Hadef, A.; Hallewell, G. D.; Hubaut, F.; Kahn, S. J.; Knoops, E. B. F. G.; Guirriec, E. Le; Liu, J.; Liu, K.; Madaffari, D.; Monnier, E.; Muanza, S.; Nagy, E.; Pralavorio, P.; Rozanov, A.; Talby, M.; Theveneaux-Pelzer, T.; Torres, R. E. Ticse; Tisserant, S.; Töth, J.; Touchard, F.; Vacavant, L.; Wang, Chen; Boumediene, D.; Busato, E.; Calvet, D.; Calvet, S.; Chomont, A. R.; Donini, J.; Gris, Ph.; Madar, R.; Pallin, D.; Santoni, C.; Simon, D.; Vazeille, F.

doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4580-0

Cited by 25 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The neutral particles (neutrons, K 0 L ), if produced close to the measured charged hadron, alter the calorimeter signal. While this effect plays some role in electromagnetic calorimeters, it is found to be negligible in the hadronic calorimeters [51]. Two hadronic interaction models implemented in the G 4 toolkit were compared, the difference in simulated E/p in the hadronic calorimeter was found to be well below 5% [51].…”

Section: Cutmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…While this effect plays some role in electromagnetic calorimeters, it is found to be negligible in the hadronic calorimeters [51]. Two hadronic interaction models implemented in the G 4 toolkit were compared, the difference in simulated E/p in the hadronic calorimeter was found to be well below 5% [51]. To conclude, the total systematic uncertainties associated with individual points in the E/p plots shown in Figure 24 are highly correlated and are estimated to be of the order of 6 %.…”

Section: Cutmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Operation and performance of the ATLAS Tile Calorimeter in Run 1

Aaboud¹,

Aad²,

Abbott³

et al. 2018

Eur. Phys. J. C

Self Cite

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Tile Calorimeter is the hadron calorimeter covering the central region of the ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider. Approximately 10,000 photomultipliers collect light from scintillating tiles acting as the active material sandwiched between slabs of steel absorber. This paper gives an overview of the calorimeter’s performance during the years 2008–2012 using cosmic-ray muon events and proton–proton collision data at centre-of-mass energies of 7 and 8 TeV with a total integrated luminosity of nearly 30 fb . The signal reconstruction methods, calibration systems as well as the detector operation status are presented. The energy and time calibration methods performed excellently, resulting in good stability of the calorimeter response under varying conditions during the LHC Run 1. Finally, the Tile Calorimeter response to isolated muons and hadrons as well as to jets from proton–proton collisions is presented. The results demonstrate excellent performance in accord with specifications mentioned in the Technical Design Report.

show abstract

Section: Cutmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Cutmentioning

confidence: 99%

Operation and performance of the ATLAS Tile Calorimeter in Run 1

Aaboud¹,

Aad²,

Abbott³

et al. 2018

Eur. Phys. J. C

Self Cite

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A description of the various models and a detailed comparison between FTFP BERT and QGSP BERT can be found in Ref. [34]. A parametrized simulation of the ATLAS calorimeter called Atlfast-II (AFII) [32] is used for faster MC production, and a dedicated MC-based calibration is derived for AFII samples.…”

Section: Data and Monte Carlo Simulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One AFII modeling uncertainty accounts for nonclosure in the absolute JES calibration of fast-simulation jets, and is applied only to AFII MC samples. A high-p T jet uncertainty is derived from single-particle response studies [34] and is applied to jets with p T > 2 TeV, beyond the reach of the in situ methods.…”

Section: Systematic Uncertaintiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Jet energy scale measurements and their systematic uncertainties in proton-proton collisions at s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Jet energy scale measurements and their systematic uncertainties are reported for jets measured with the ATLAS detector using proton-proton collision data with a center-of-mass energy of ffiffi ffi s p ¼ 13 TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 3.2 fb −1 collected during 2015 at the LHC. Jets are reconstructed from energy deposits forming topological clusters of calorimeter cells, using the anti-k t algorithm with radius parameter R ¼ 0.4. Jets are calibrated with a series of simulation-based corrections and in situ techniques. In situ techniques exploit the transverse momentum balance between a jet and a reference object such as a photon, Z boson, or multijet system for jets with

show abstract

“…In CMS, dedicated ECAL (based on photons) and HCAL (based on neutral kaons) calibrations are combined to account for energy and |η|dependent non-linearities in the hadron calorimeter response [53]. Both ATLAS and CMS validate the performance of these calibrations with single particle studies in data [53,58].…”

Section: Inputsmentioning

confidence: 99%