• John
  • Felde
  • UC Davis
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • USLHC
  • USLHC
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Frank
  • Simon
  • MPI for Physics
  • Germany

Latest Posts

  • CERN
  • Geneva
  • Switzerland

Latest Posts

  • Aidan
  • Randle-Conde
  • USLHC
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • TRIUMF
  • Vancouver, BC
  • Canada

Latest Posts

  • Seth
  • Zenz
  • USLHC
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Anna
  • Phan
  • USLHC
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Alexandre
  • Fauré
  • CEA/IRFU
  • FRANCE

Latest Posts

  • Burton
  • DeWilde
  • USLHC
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Jim
  • Rohlf
  • USLHC
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Zoe Louise
  • Matthews
  • ASY-EOS
  • UK

Latest Posts

  • Ken
  • Bloom
  • USLHC
  • USA

Latest Posts

Posts Tagged ‘data’

Update: Section added to include LEP11 Results on Higgs Boson Exclusion (01 Sept 2011)

Expect bold claims at this week’s SUSY 2011 (#SUSY11 on Twitter, maybe) Conference at Fermilab, in Batavia, Illinois. No, I do not have any secret information about some analysis that undoubtedly proves Supersymmetry‘s existence; though, it would be pretty cool if such an analysis does exist. I say this because I came back from a short summer school/pre-conference that gave a very thorough introduction to the mathematical framework behind a theory that supposes that there exists a new and very powerful relationship between particles that make up matter, like electrons & quarks (fermions), and particles that mediate the forces in our universe, like photons & gluons (bosons). This theory is called “Supersymmetry”, or “SUSY” for short, and might explain many of the shortcomings of our current description of how Nature works.

At this summer school, appropriately called PreSUSY 2011, we were additionally shown the amount of data that the Large Hadron Collider is expected to collect before the end of this year and at the end of 2012. This is where the game changer appeared. Back in June 2011, CERN announced that it had collected 1 fb-1 (1 inverse femtobarn) worth of data – the equivalent of 70,000 billion proton-proton collisions – a whole six months ahead of schedule. Yes, the Large Hadron Collider generated a year’s worth of data in half a year’s time. What is more impressive is that the ATLAS and CMS experiments may each end up collecting upwards of 5 fb-1 before the end of this year, a benchmark number a large number of people said would be a “highly optimistic goal” for 2012. I cannot emphasize how crazy & surreal it is to be seriously discussing the possibility of having 10 fb-1, or even 15 fb-1, by the end of 2012.

Figure 1: Up-to-date record of the total number of protons collisions delivered to each of the Large Hadron Collider Detector Experiments. (Image: CERN)

What this means is that by the end of this year, not next year, we will definitely know whether or not the higgs boson, as predicted by the Standard Model, exists. It also means that by next year, experimentalists will be able to rule out the most basic versions of Supersymmetry which were already ruled out by previous, high-precision measurements of previously known (electroweak) physics. Were we to find Supersymmetry at the LHC now and not when the LHC is at designed specifications, which are expected to be reached in 2014, then many physicists would be at a loss trying to rectify why one set of measurements rule out SUSY but another set of measurements support its existence.

What we can expect this week, aside from the usual higgs boson and SUSY exclusion plots, are a set of updated predictions as to where we expect to be this time next year. Now that the LHC has given us more data than we had anticipated we can truly explore the unknown, so trust me when I say that the death of SUSY has been greatly exaggerated.

More on Higgs Boson Exclusion (Added 01 Sept 2011)

This morning a new BBC article came out on the possibility of the higgs being found by Christmas. So why not add some plots, shown at August’s Lepton-Photon 2011 Conference, that show this? These plots were taken from Vivek Sharma’s Higgs Searches at CMS talk.

If there is no Standard Model higgs boson, then the Compact Muon Solenoid Detector, one of the two general purpose LHC detectors, should be able to exclude the boson, singlehandedly, with a 95% Confidence Level. ATLAS, the second of the two general purpose detectors, is similarly capable of such an exclusion.

Figure A: The CMS Collaboration projected sensitivity to excluding the higgs boson with 5 fb-1 at √s = 7 TeV; the black line gives combined (total) sensitivity.

Things get less clear if there is a higgs boson because physical & statistical fluctuations adds to our uncertainty. If CMS does collect 5 fb-1 before the winter shutdown, then it is capable of claiming at least a 3σ (three-sigma) discovery for a higgs boson with a mass anywhere between mH≈ 120 GeV/c2 and mH ≈ 550 GeV/c2 . For a number of (statistical/systematic) reasons, the range might shrink or expand with 5 fb-1 worth of data but only by a few GeV/c2. In statistics, “σ” (sigma) is the Greek letter that represents a standard deviation; a “3σ result” implies that there is only a 0.3% chance of being a fluke. The threshold for discovery is set at 5σ, or a 0.000 06% of being a random fluke.

Figure B: The CMS Collaboration projected sensitivity to discovering the higgs boson with 1 (black), 2 (brown?), 5 (blue), and 10 (pink)  fb-1 at √s = 7 TeV.

By itself, the CMS detector is no longer sensitive. By combing their results, however, a joint ATLAS-CMS combined analysis can do the full 3σ discovery and a 5σ job down to 128 GeV/c2. The 114 GeV/c2 benchmark that physicists like to throw around is lower bound on the higgs boson mass set by CERN’s LEP Collider, which shutdown in 2000 to make room for the LHC.

Figure C: The projected sensitivity of a joint ATLAS-CMS analysis for SM higgs exclusion & discovery for various benchmark data sets.

However, there are two caveat in all of this. The smaller one is that these results depend on another 2.5 fb-1 being delivered by the upcoming winter shutdown; if there are any more major halts in data collection, then the mark will be missed. The second, and more serious, caveat is that this whole time I have been talking about the Standard Model higgs boson, which has a pretty rigid set of assumptions. If there is new physics, then all these discovery/exclusion bets are off. :)

Nature’s Little Secrets

On my way to PreSUSY, a good colleague of mine & I decided to stop by Fermilab to visit a friend and explore the little secret nooks that makes Fermilab, in my opinion, one of the most beautiful places in the world (keep in mind, I really love the Musée d’Orsay). What makes Fermilab such an gorgeous place is that is doubles as a federally sanctioned nature preserve! From bison to butterflies, the lab protects endangered or near-endangered habitats while simultaneously reaching back to the dawn of the Universe. Here is a little photographic tour of some of Nature’s best kept secrets. All the photos can be enlarged by clicking on them. Enjoy!

Figure 2: The main entrance to the Enrico Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, U.S. Dept. of Energy Laboratory Designation: FNAL, nicknamed Fermilab. The three-way arch that does not connect evenly at the top is called Broken Symmetry and appropriately represents the a huge triumph of Theoretical (Solid State & High Energy) Physics: Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking. Wilson Hall, nicknamed “The High-Rise” can be see in the background. (Image: Mine).

Figure 3: Wilson Hall, named after FNAL’s first director and Manhattan Project Scientist Robert Wilson, is where half of Fermilab’s magic happens. Aside from housing all the theorists & being attached to the Tevatron Control Room, it also houses a second control room for the CMS Detector called the Remote Operations Center. Yes, the CMS Detector can be fully controlled from Fermilab. The photo was taken from the center of the Tevatron ring. (Image: Mine)

Figure 4: A wetlands preserve located at the center of the Tevatron accelerator ring. The preservation has been so successful at restoring local fish that people with an Illinois fishing license (See FAQ) are actually allowed to fish. From what I have been told, the fish are exceptionally delicious the closer you get to the Main Ring. I wonder if it has anything to do with all that background neutrino rad… never mind. :)
Disclaimer: The previous line was a joke; the radiation levels at Fermilab are well within safety limits! (Image: Mine)

Figure 5: The Feynman Computing Center (left) and BZero (right), a.k.a., The CDF Detector Collision Hall. The Computing Center, named after the late Prof. Richard Feynman, cannot be justly compared to any other data center, except with maybe CERN‘s computing center. Really, there is so much experimental computer research, custom built electronics, and such huge processing power that there are no benchmarks that allows for it to be compared. Places like Fermilab and CERN set the benchmarks. The Collider Detector at Fermilab, or CDF for short, is one of two general purpose detectors at Fermilab that collects and analyzes the decay products of proton & anti-proton collisions. Magic really does happen in that collision hall. (Image: Mine)

Figure 6: The DZero Detector Collision Hall (blue building, back), Tevatron Colling River (center) , and Collision Hall Access Road (foreground). Like CDF (Figure 5), DZero is one of two general-purpose detectors at Fermilab that collects and analyzes the decay products of proton & anti-proton collisions. There is no question that the Tevatron generates a lot of heat. It was determined long ago that by taking advantage of the area’s annual rainfall and temperature the operating costs of running the collider could be drastically cut by using naturally replenishable source of water to cool the collider. If there were ever a reason to invest in a renewable energy source, this would be it. The access road doubles as a running/biking track for employees and site visitors. If you run, one question that is often asked by other scientists is if you are a proton or anti-proton. The anti-protons travel clockwise in the Main Ring and hence you are called an anti-proton if you bike/run with the anti-protons; the protons travel counter-clockwise. FYI: I am an anti-proton. (Image: Mine)

Figure 7: The Barn (red barn, right) and American bison pen (fence, foreground). Fermilab was built on prairie land and so I find it every bit appropriate that the laboratory does all it can to preserve an important part of America’s history, i.e., forging the Great American Frontier. Such a legacy of expanding to the unknown drives Fermilab’s mantra of being an “Ongoing Pioneer of Exploring the Frontier of Discovery.” (Image: Mine)

Figure 8: American bison (bison bison) in the far background (click to enlarge). At the time of the photo, a few calves had just recently been born. (Image: Mine)

 

Happy Colliding.

 

- richard (@bravelittlemuon)

 

 

During my brief time participating in the wide world of High Energy Physics (HEP) I have learned many, many things.   But above all, if there is one thing I’ve come to understand, it’s that there will never be enough:

 

Coffee

While some people may concern themselves with blood alcohol content.  I spend my time thinking about blood caffeine content.  I’ve become thoroughly addicted as a grad student, and without my daily (or sometimes hourly) “fix,” I doubt I would get anything done.

But caffeine isn’t just my own vice (or at least that’s the addict in me talking), I’ve come to think its a necessary evil within all fields of research.  As an example, there are not one, not two, but four coffee pots on my floor of the Physics & Chemistry building; and I’m not even counting the chemistry side (or those that may be found in offices).

The coffee pot that I contribute to is filled twice a day (at least).  We go through several containers of half & half every week, along with a tub of say Maxwell House coffee.  We rely on everyone to contribute to keep this stream of liquid productivity flowing.

My own coffee mug has become to be known as “The Soup Bowl” among the grad students & professors on my floor.  I maintained that it is a coffee mug, however I’ve been fighting a losing battle ever since the start of last spring semester.  But whether its a mug for drinking coffee or a bowl for holding chicken noodle soup, I would get a whole lot less done in a day without this beautiful piece of ceramic:

 

My coffee mug, compared with a "normal" coffee mug

 

And even though this mug fits a gigantic amount of coffee; I’ve come to think that it’s never enough.

 

Hours in a Day

While I need coffee to get through the hours of my day, I just really wish there were more of them.

My day begins between 8-10 am (usually depending on when I get home from the night before); I usually end up having to work until as late as 8-9pm (or sometimes even midnight) to accomplish what I need to for the day.  I spend my time corresponding with other physicists via email, attending meetings, reading papers, and computer programming.  It’s a lot of work, but I enjoy what I do.  However, I am of the opinion that the sunrise and sunset should be a bit farther apart.

 

"Zed, don't you guys ever get any sleep around here?" - Jay, "The twins keep us on Centaurian time, standard thirty-seven hour day. Give it a few months. You'll get used to it... or you'll have a psychotic episode." -Zed (Men In Black, 1997)

 

Personnel

It’s been my experience that every single analysis in CMS can always benefit from more people becoming involved.

To give you an idea of what tasks are involved in an analysis, here’s a generic outline most conform to:

  1. Define experimental techniques
  2. Perform measurements
  3. Determine backgrounds
  4. Analyze experimental/theoretical uncertainties
  5. Obtain approval (each of the LHC’s Collaborations undergo an internal peer-review process before submitting for publication in an external peer-review journal).

 

These tasks take time, and above all, they need warm bodies (who sometimes have more in common with Zombies, sans coffee that is).

But HEP is a collaborative science. Within a given experiment (such as CMS or ATLAS) we all work together to make sure research is conducted precisely, and promptly.  Each individual within the CMS Collaboration is usually juggling a series of different analyses.  The time they invest in each of these analyses varies.  However, each researcher usually has one project which is their “pet project,” and  occupies the majority of their time.

But needless to say, HEP is a massive undertaking, and it seems like there are never enough Physicists/Grad Students involved.

 

Data

What’s the difference between one inverse femtobarn (fb-1) of data, and say ten, or a hundred??  Only a series of discoveries that will forever change our understanding of the universe.  You know, nothing major.

Humor aside, the experiments at the LHC have collected over 1 fb-1 of data this past year.  And there have been several times in which we collected more data in a day then we did in all of 2010 (which I find astounding):

 

Integrated luminosity delivered to/recorded by the CMS Detector per day. Note the 2010 data set consisted of only ~43.3 pb^-1. (Image Courtsey of the CMS Collaboration)

Total integrated luminosity delivered to/recorded by the CMS Detector in 2011. (Image Courtesy of the CMS Collaboration)

 

 

But what’s the big deal?  Well, one of the rules of thumb in particle physics says: to have a discovery, you need to have a statistical significance of five sigma over your current theory/background.  Simply put, the chances that your discovery is a statistical fluke must be less then 0.01%.

While this may seem a bit ad hoc, it is actually necessary.  Three sigma effects come and go in particle physics.

But because of this stringent requirement we are always asking for more.  We always wish for our colliding beams to have a higher luminosity.  We always want the time between crossings of particles in the detector to be minimized.  In short, we always want more data, and there is never enough!

Who knows what is on the horizon of tomorrow’s proton collisions.  I for one have no idea, but I avidly look forward to the coming “more glorious dawn.”

 

CPU’s

I’m sure my colleagues have differing opinions on what is and is not needed in high energy physics.  But, I adamantly believe there are two things all of us would agree on.  We always need more data, and we always need more CPU’s.

Cluster computing is the name of the game.  There are rooms at HEP Labs that can usually be heard from “miles away” (or at least a few meters).  They literally hum with activity.  To me it sounds like raw science.  To someone more “normal,” it probably sounds like hundreds of fans all operating at once (which is exactly what it is).  These rooms are filled with racks upon racks of computers, all linked in some fashion.  Users all over the country/world submit hundreds of thousands of “jobs,” or research tasks, to these clusters.  In each of these jobs, a piece of the cluster is given some software a researcher has developed, and use this software to analyze data.

As an example, I perform a relatively small analysis (with respect to the scope of LHC Physics), but I run between 7.5-14K computing jobs a week.  Job number is a bit arbitrary though; this is because a user specifies how large each job is.  To be a bit more concrete, the size of all the data & simulated samples I need for my work is over 80 terabytes.

So how do I, and other physicists, analyze all this data?  With jobs!

And here’s how it works: one of my data sets has roughly 35 million events.  If I attempt to process this data all at once, with one computer (even recent jeopardy champion Watson) it will take forever.  Instead, I break the task of data analysis up into many many tasks (aka jobs).  Each job will analyze 25-50K events.  In this manner high energy physics makes use of “parallel-computing,” and save time.

But why do we need this job system, how long would it really take to process that data in one shot?  Well assuming a spherical cow, each of my jobs takes ~12 hours.  To run over those 35 Million events I mentioned, I need 3836 jobs.  So at 12 hours a job, it would take Watson ~5.3 years to process all the data if it was done in one job.

So much for getting my degree in less then a decade (and heaven forbid I make a mistake!).

But the irony of having so many physicists participating in a HEP experiment, is that not everyone will have all of their jobs running at a time.  Each cluster has a finite number of CPU’s, and a seemingly infinite amount of jobs submitted to it (continually).  What usually happens is a person will have anywhere between 6 to 600 of their jobs running at a time (depending on who else is using the cluster).

So to analyze data, it could take anywhere between a night to a week.  And in this regard, I believe we will never have enough CPU’s.

 

 

Until next time,

-Brian

LHC is GO!!!

Sunday, March 13th, 2011

Hi, all!

It feels like forever since the LHC last delivered proton-proton collisions (… in early November). There was a very productive stretch of heavy-ion collisions followed by the usual winter shutdown, and then a few weeks of machine development that ended… just now.

Yes: The first stable beam p-p collisions of the year are happening at this very moment! As always, you can see the LHC status live: here.

The 2011 dataset promises to be EPIC. Stay tuned — lots of physics to come!

– Burton :D

Exciting new results from CMS

Tuesday, September 21st, 2010

I’m giddy today because CMS just came out with some very exciting results.  I don’t think we understand what they mean at all – and as a scientist, there is nothing I love better than shocking data, data that challenge what we think we understand.  (For the technical audience, the slides from the talk at CERN are here and the paper is here.)  I might be biased because this topic is very closely related to my doctoral thesis, but I think it’s safe to say this is the first surprising result from the LHC, something that changes our paradigm.

In heavy ion collisions at the relativistic heavy ion collider we observed something called the ridge (from this paper):

We more or less understand the peak – called the “jet-like correlation” – but we don’t understand the broad structure the peak is sitting on.  This broad structure is called the ridge.  What I mean when I say we don’t understand the ridge is that we haven’t settled in the field how this structure is formed, where it comes from.  We have a lot of models that can produce something similar, but they can’t describe the ridge quantitatively.

Here’s what CMS saw:

It’s a slightly different type of measurement – I’ve put a box around the part with the ridge.  We see the same peak as we saw before – again, we pretty much understand where this comes from.  But there’s a broad structure beneath this peak.  It’s smaller than what we saw in heavy ion collisions above, but it’s there – the fact that it’s there is surprising.

In the models we have from heavy ion collisions the ridge is from:

  • A high energy quark or gluon losing energy in the Quark Gluon Plasma,
  • Collective motion of particles in the Quark Gluon Plasma, or
  • Remnants of the initial state (meaning the incoming particles)

In our current understanding of what goes on in a proton-proton collision, there is no Quark Gluon Plasma – so the conservative interpretation of these data would mean that the ridge is somehow some remnant of the initial state. Even conservatively, this would severely constrain our models.  Some physicists, such as Mike Lisa at Ohio State University, have proposed that there may be collective motion of particles in proton-proton collisions, similar to what we see in heavy ion collisions.  This would imply that we also see a medium in proton-proton collisions.  That would be a huge discovery.  (Just to be clear, CMS is not making this claim, at least at this point.)  It will take a while for the community to debate the meaning of these data and come to a consensus on what they mean.  But these data are definitely very exciting – this is the most exciting day for me since the first collisions!

Getting fired up again!

Sunday, January 31st, 2010

As the time approaches for the reinitiation of LHC operations, we are starting to feel the excitement  of this grandiose experiment again.

With the Tevatron’s first direct constraint on the mass of the Higgs boson beyond good-old LEP’s this past week, physicists in all LHC experiments are getting ready and more excited to re-start operations and finally gather some data that allow them to search for new physics and hopefully complement or surpass very quickly the astonishing Tevatron results.  Meanwhile, LHC physicists and engineers are finalizing the improvements in the quench protection systems that will allow us to run at the energy of 3.5 TeV/beam, starting middle February.

My two cents, as always, consists of collaborating in putting the CMS trigger system in the best condition possible to start taking good data.  This time though, we are using “real” data from last year’s operations as opposed to using “simulated” data.  No more relying entirely on Monte Carlo, no more tweaking and tuning and speculating about our computer simulations.  This is the real deal guys!!

What we do with the data is to skim it off-line into a collection of good and interesting events, then we feed them into our on-line system and run the trigger menu to check its performance.  These data has all the information, event by event, that the detector collected (in the form of electronic signals) from those proton-proton collisions we had last year.  For these past month or so, we have been capable of touching nature’s primary constituents over and over in order to adapt our detectors and tune them to be able to better sense the most fantastic petals of life: particles!

Edgar Carrera (Boston University)

Listening to data

Thursday, January 29th, 2009

Darn it, Peter got to it first, but I too would like to call your attention to the interesting essay that Dennis Overbye wrote in The New York Times this week.  (I have to post more rapidly.)  It reflects upon President Obama’s call to “restore science to its rightful place,” and the interplay between science and democracy.  There is a shout-out to the LHC in there, as he remarks that people from a great variety of backgrounds have happily worked together (or at least happily enough) on these projects.

I agree with Overbye’s arguments, but the essay, which asserts that democracy is one of the values of science, got me thinking about what other values that science gives us.  I think that one of the most important values for me is one that Overbye touches on a little: the value of listening to what nature is telling us.  In science, that means listening to the data that our experiments provide. 

There are many ways to be creative in science — in my particular science, we create new acceleration technologies, devise new ways to detect particles, and find clever ways to analyze our data so that we can measure particle properties with the smallest possible uncertainty.  We have a healthy appreciation, and admiration, for ideas that we haven’t seen before that turn out to have a big payoff.  Practitioners of theoretical physics can build very creative theories that explain current measurements and make predictions for future results.  But there is one thing that we are never creative about, and that’s what the actual answers are.  Those we can only find by doing the experiments — we can’t make it up, we can’t guess, we can’t rely on the opinions of others, we can’t be superstitious.  All of the creativity we have must bump up against the realities that nature presents us with, and if our hypotheses disagree with the data we record, we must discard them.  It is a little humbling, in a way.

But on the other hand, it is also empowering.  So many answers may be out there, if we only open our eyes and look!  This is obviously true of something like particle physics, but I think it applies to a broader range of human problems.  What kind of programs are effective in reducing societal ills?  What economic policies might improve the lives of the largest number of people?  You can try them out and see what works, or analyze the results of previous attempts to implement them, and see if those worked.  We can do better than just following a philosophical ideal or notion — we can test our creativity against the real world.  Obviously these sorts of “experiments” have all sorts of complications that physics experiments don’t.  But we can still collect data and learn something from nature.  Perhaps that is one of the rightful places of science that Obama has in mind?

First ATLAS Pixel Tracks!

Sunday, September 14th, 2008

I’m on my 18th hour on training shift since Saturday morning, getting in as much time in the control room as I can, and it’s been a very exciting time. One of my colleagues has just discovered that, last night, we recorded the first cosmic ray tracks in the ATLAS pixel detector!

First ATLAS Pixel Detector Track!

This is very exciting news for us; we’re working right up to the wire to make sure our pixel detector is able to run stably along with the rest of the detector. Collisions are coming soon soon soon!

Update (Sept 15): In response to two excellent questions in the comments, I wrote in a little more detail what you’re looking at in the picture. I figure the explanations might as well go in the entry:

1. What’s the perspective? Where’s the LHC?

You’re looking at the inner part of the ATLAS detector, which is wrapped around one of the collision points of the LHC. The large image in the upper left is a cross-section of the detector; the white dot in the very center is where the LHC beam pipe is. The image along the bottom shows the same tracks from the side; the LHC beam pipe isn’t shown, but it would run horizontally (along the Y’ = 0 cm line).

2. What do the dot colors mean? What’s the line?

All the dots are the actual points at which we have a signal from our detector. The red dots represent the signal that we think was left by a charged particle when it passed through, and the red line is the path we think that particle took (i.e. the “track”). The green dots are also signals in the detector, but we think they’re random firings in our electronics, because we can’t make any tracks out of them.

It may look like a lot of electronic noise, because there are more hits from random firings than from the track. But remember that there were only one or two tracks to be found, whereas we have over eighty million pixels in our detector. Thus the fraction of noisy pixels was actually quite small, and certainly didn’t interfere with finding the track. We also have a list of especially noisy pixels that we can “mask” (i.e. ignore), which will bring down the noise by quite a lot but which we haven’t begun to use yet.

pictures of muons

Friday, July 25th, 2008

Below are some nice pictures the ATLAS detector took of muons created in the atmosphere that passed through Meyrin, Switzerland on July 21, 2008 (or technically “Event Displays from M8 Week”). The lines are the paths the muons took through the ATLAS detector, according to the reconstruction software. You can see the detector elements that actually recorded something are lit up along those paths. The reconstruction software “connects the dots”.

In each image are several views from different perspectives, or projections. The top projection in each image is the view down the beam axis, sort of what will be the “proton’s eye view” during collisions. The one below that is the view from alongside the detector.

CMS in Cyprus

Wednesday, July 9th, 2008

Hah!

If I’m quick I’ll get this in just after Peter’s blog. While ATLAS went to Berne, CMS went to Limmasol (Lemesos) Cyprus for the collaboration meeting. Now, it is rather a critical time, so the wisdom of going fairly far away is dubious, but getting the upper management and riffraff out of the hair of those really doing the work for a while is maybe not such a terrible idea. I’m told it was quiet and people could get work done at CERN. Anyway, I had a good time-Limmasol is a resort town, so it wasn’t particularly serene (think Miami Beach for Brits and rich Russians) but I did get into the countryside a little which was quite nice. Also, my buddy Chris proposed an alternative excursion to the one planned for the whole collaboration, which was very fun, since I only get to do this particular activity once every blue moon. He’s on the right, I’m on the left

In other news, we have tracks in our tracker! Triggered by Cosmics via the muon chambers, with more than 95% of it turned on! So far performance looks really excellent, I’ll provide more details soon

Event Viewing

Thursday, May 22nd, 2008

Being able to visualize events in the detector is critical to understanding whether everything is functioning properly. But creating a program to display events in practice is incredibly difficult. I have the utmost respect for people who attempt it.

Obviously the big hurdle to event viewing is trying to display a three-dimensional detector on a two-dimensional screen. ATLAS has two solutions to this. One is Atlantis, the tried-and-true event viewer. The philosophy of Atlantis is to try and present the ATLAS detector in every two-dimensional slice possible. Such as this picture here.

Atlantis Event Viewer

From top left going clockwise, you see the full detector as if you were looking down the beam pipe, then the same cross section zoomed in on the calorimeters, then again the same cross section showing the inner detector, then a ‘bird’s eye’ view looking down on the beam pipe, and lastly a side profile of the detector (where the beam pipe is now the horizontal plane).

Atlantis as a tool is very useful but as for style… hmmm, not so much. It does have that retro look and while retro in fashion is considered acceptable, retro in computing is generally not.

Our second option is Visual Point 1 or VP1. VP1 takes the opposite approach. Going totally 3-dimensional, allowing the users to to place himself/herself at any point in the detector. In this picture, the view point is outside the calorimeter.

Atlas VP1 Viewer

The detector is just a shadow, barely seen in the picture and only the hits are shown (in yellow here). While VP1 definitely has that more modern feel, the jury is still out for me. It kind of reminds me of Tron. And it is too touchy. You accidentally hold the mouse button down too long and you are transported to some strange view point. And then you have no idea where you are, or what you are looking at.

It is a thankless job that is for sure!