Main Web>TWikiUsers>MattHerndon>MFHDaily>MFHDaily2019 (2020-01-03, MattHerndon)

EditAttachPDF

Daily web log book

2019 01 02 Rivet FSQ-15-006 progress, Jithin and Andrew prelim slides, meeting and tasks, Rivet recent published analysis, organized meeting and tasks, Identified analysis for cross section summary update, Reviewed ssWW NLO QCD paper, suggested text on NLO EWK corrections, CF4 usage email
2019 01 03 WZ NLO EWK text, updated CV, updated xs summary data, travel schedule, read ATLAS WZ paper
2019 01 04 xs summary preliminary results survey, EWK WZ+PS paper, LHC EW workshop
2019 01 07 UW CMS meeting
2019 01 08 SMP VV meeting, aTGC conversions, paper reading, xs summary plot update
2019 01 09 RU segment builder tests,
2019 01 10 RU segment builder tests, xs summary EWK WZ update, FSQ-15-006 Rivet, CDF meeting
2019 01 11 xs summary WZ results, CMS meetings, Comments on Andrew's and Jithin's prelim drafts
2019 01 16 UW CMS meeting, CV update, Muon meetings
2019 01 15 WZ EWK and inclusive xs and aCs, CV update
2019 01 16 Triple top paper, Thesis status, prelim status, Rivet progress
2019 01 18 CSC team meeting and minutes, CSC Efficiency plan
2019 01 22 CSC RU Segment builder studies
2019 01 24 UW CMS meeting, Andrew prelim
2019 01 25 UW CSC meeting, Jithin prelim, SMP-18-007 ARC chair, CSC RU Segment Builder studies, CPT7 for GBTx testing
2019 01 28 UW CMS meeting, Run WZ analysis, VV Rivet analysis, MC CSC Val slides, CSC DPG and R&D milestones
2019 01 29 SMP VV VBS Zg pre approval, CSC electronics meeting minutes on CPT7 GBTx testing issue, CSC Val MC comparisons email
2019 01 30 ZZ HEPData, CSC Val MC comparisons comments
2019 01 31 ZZ HEPData, CSC Val MC comparisons comments
2019 02 01 CSC team meeting, ZZ HEPData, CSC Val MC comparisons responses
2019 02 03 Grad Admissions CMS
2019 02 04 CSC performance plots for 2018, RU segment builder, CPT7 GBTx testing issue, Run 2 EWK ZWZ plots, Grad Admissions CMS, ZZ HEPData, UW CMS meeting
2019 02 05 Neutron background MC comparisons, Muon conference committee, Muon institution list, WZ HEPData complete, Asked for WZ Rivet entry
2019 02 06 Muon conference committee, P5 and SX5 visit, CSC Muon institution list complete, SMP-18-008 ARC review organization, SMP meeting
2019 02 07 Black article, Grant financial database, CSC meeting
2019 02 08 Muon institution list complete, Meeting on CSC Efficiency progress
2019 02 11 UW CMS meeting, ZZ uncertainty discussion, SMP nomination,
2019 02 12 ZZ pre approval an discussion, CSC finances and parts
2019 02 13 CSC finances and parts, ZZ CMS/ATLAS comparison
2019 02 14 ZZ polarization, Downham Rivet progress
2019 02 15 CSC team meeting, SMP-18-007 ARC review, ZZ analysis comment, new neutron background samples. MBI organization
2019 02 18 UW CMS meeting
2019 02 19 ZZ analysis goals and luminosity uncertainty
2019 02 20 Detailed luminosity uncertainty
2019 02 21 Neutron background studies
2019 02 22 CSC team meeting, MBI organization
2019 04 07 EWK WZ correction paper, IR SUS-18-007, Rivet code access
2019 04 08 UW CMS meeting, ZZ polarization, EWK Zg review scale and acceptance,
2019 04 09 Muon meetings, cooling discussion, ZZ polarization, EWK Zg review scale and acceptance, Muon conference committee organization
2019 04 10 Long thesis talk comments, Reviewed Rivet routine for SMP-16-015, Rivet organization
2019 04 11 SMP meeting, EWK Zg review scale and acceptance, CINCO MBI CMS talks, Rivet prioritization, Rivet plugin contact requests, Muon IB meeting
2019 04 12 EWK Zg review ARC status, Rivet plugin contact requests, US CMS meeting travel
2019 04 13 Muon conference committee plan comments, H+jets xs, EPR pledges, Rivet WZ plugin
2019 04 15 UW CMS meeting
2019 04 16 xs summary Higgs+jets, Kenneth defense practice
2019 04 17 Move to using CMS software and MC for Rivet VV project, Kenneth thesis defense
2019 04 18 Muon CSC meeting, Zg clarify publication strategy
2019 04 19 Transverse momentum re summation paper
2019 04 22 UW meeting, Keegan ZZ cross section results, Dosimeter documentation for Isa
2019 04 23 HEPData EW WZ
2019 04 25 UW Muon meeting, CSC efficiencies, current vs charge relationships, neutron background code, Muon Conf TWEEP abstract
2019 04 29 UW CMS meeting, EFT Zg model, Muon TWEPP Abstract
2019 04 30 Muon TWEPP Abstract, Update aQCC plots with EW WZ
2019 05 02 UW muon meeting, Question on field in GEM
2019 05 03 Comments addressed on CMS-SUS-18-005, DPF gas and aging abstract
2019 05 06 UW CMS meeting, EPS muon poster
2019 05 08 HepData Rivet conversions, CSC electronics upgrade abstract
2019 05 09 UW muon meeting
2019 05 10 UW muon meeting minutes
2019 05 13 EPS poster issue, general VBS cuts, Call EW Zg ARC Author meeting
2019 05 14 EPS poster issue Isa, Review Usama LHCP VV talk
2019 05 15 EW Zg ARC author meeting and minutes, Data/MC CSC comparison use Zskim, aC plot including CMS WV
2019 05 16 EW ZZ cross section to compare data/MC, aC plot editing, UW muon meeting
2019 05 17 aC summary alpha sin2theta at mZ, HFO status, UW muon meeting minutes
2019 05 18 muon SM nominations, alpha sin2theta at mZ issue
2019 05 20 UW CMS meeting, EW Zg+2jet unblinded results
2019 05 21 EW WZ HepData, updated aC plots constants and new analysis, EFT aC plot, Scale variation issue question, EPS CSC poster
2019 05 22 EPS CSC poster, Rivet generator issues
2019 05 23 He for ME234/1 team, question of WZ aC results, EW Zg question review and followup
2019 05 24 EW Zg question review and followup, aC EFT plot summary
2019 05 28 EW Zg scale uncertainty results, aC alpha sin2theta at mZ, ZZ rivet metadata question
2019 05 29 muon SM IB meeting, EW Zg signal in and out of fiducial treatment
2019 05 30 EW Zg signal in and out of fiducial treatment
2019 05 31 MBI talks advertise, sc help
2019 06 03 UW CMS meeting, IR for the TOP-18-003 CWR, First data/MC comparison with HP neutron simulation, Rivet ZZ results
2019 06 04 Rivet ZZ results check jet and lepton cuts, request to give talk at Multibosons At The Energy Frontier workshop July 25 26, EW WZ HEPData changes
2019 06 05 EW Zg signal in and out of fiducial treatment an scale variations and call for green light
2019 06 06 US CMS meeting , CSC CMS week analysis talk for Stephen, ZZ polarization meeting to schedule, aC results triboson and full check results and conversions
2019 06 07 US CMS meeting, EW Zg ready for green light after authors update documentation, Discuss new muon abstracts NEC19 and IPRD19,
2019 06 08 US CMS meeting, Rivet routines out of jet group
2019 06 10 UW CMS meeting, Muon SM manager, Article on statistics in HEP, LP muon poster notification, ZZ Rivet
2019 06 11 aC D6 vs. D8 interference, VV Rivet next steps, EW Zg questions on aQGC limits,
2019 06 12 EW Zg updated documentation, Jet systematics, SMP-16-105 Rivet status
2019 06 13 UW Muon mening, ZZ EW and QCD Rivet
2019 06 14 NEC 2019 CSC abstract, EW Zg reviewed updated documentation,
2019 06 17 UW CMS meeting, Isabelle SIMP progress, ideas for progress in CSC Data MC comparison, TOP-18-003 CWR IR submitted
2019 06 19 EW Zg aQGC comments, WZ talk instructions, ZZ QCD comparison and selection
2019 06 20 EW Zg aQGC understood, Question on thermal PAD order status, Tenure letter
2019 06 21 EW Zg green light, CSC Aluminum cover problem, QCD ZZ Rivet scale factors and weights
2019 06 23 Discussion on Muon system manager, larger covers
2019 06 24 Discussion on Muon system manager, Follow up on thermal pads, Comments on CSC poster, CSC electronics meeting, CMS meeting day 1, UW CMS meeting
2019 06 25 Muon meetings, CSC EW WZ talk, EW Zg paper review, Discussion of Muon system manager, long term CSC people discussion
2019 06 26 SMP meeting, Muon system manager discussion, aC plots email
2019 06 27 EW WZ published and HEPData complete, Upgrade plenary, NEC19 CSC talk done, NEC19 CSC hit reconstruction talk, MBI CMS talks, EW Zg new results, US CMS meeting
2019 06 28 UW WZ updated CV, Thermal Pads arrive, EMU operations budget, CSC student upgrade commitments, CDF W rare decays review
2019 06 29 Reviewed neutron background note, Reviewed CSCValidation code, Sent instruction on CSCVal data/MC comparison, MBI 2019 announcement, SMP-VV survey
2019 07 01 UW CMS meeting, GMM meeting, comments on CSC upgrade poster 2, TWEPP poster, MBI advertisement
2019 07 02 September CERN trip book
2019 07 03 CSC meeting, Particle physics reading
2019 07 05 NEC2019 abstract, CMS EMU budget, EW Zg+2j comments
2019 07 07 W to charm X GP review
2019 07 08 UW CMS meeting, Stephens WZ results, Keegan VV Rivet progress, Muon budget issues, EMU SOW
2019 07 09 Moun projects status, EPS practice talks, FNAL diboson talk, Kenneths multiboson framework
2019 07 10 CSC meeting, Muon budget status, UW CMS students meeting, Keegan VV Rivet progress
2019 07 11 student physics projects
2019 07 12 Keegan Rivet ssWW information, EW Zg summery plots
2019 07 15 NEC19 CSC data monitoring plot, UW CMS meeting, top IR comments
2019 07 16 Physics discussion
2019 07 17 UW CMS student meeting, CSC meeting, W+c summery plot
2019 07 19 CSC Covers
2019 07 22 UW CMS meeting, BPH-16-004 IR, CSC MC muon problems, CSC Covers, Diboson talk outline
2019 07 23 Diboson talk,
2019 07 24 Diboson talk, CSC meeting
2019 07 25 Mutiboson workshop
2019 07 26 Mutiboson workshop, ttZ cross section, CSC aluminum covers, VH HH MBI talk, W to D note
2019 07 29 UW CMS meeting, Muon PM discussion, EW Zg CWR comments, VH HH MBI talk, Safety courses, ssWW Rivet analysis, thermal pads, SMEFT workshop
2019 07 30 thermal pads, ssWW samples, SMP-VV and SMP-COM nominations
2019 07 31 CSC meeting, DQM talk, He CSC refurbishment,
2019 08 01 CSC radiation issues, CSC segment efficiencies, Phones, differential Rivet plots
2019 08 02 Fake lepton backgrounds in B physics, Muon conference status, Summary plots update
2019 08 05 UW CMS meeting, SMEFT acceptance, Review LP multiboson talk, VH HH MBI talk, BPH-16-004 IR for CWR
2019 08 06 MBI talks content, HIN-19-003 review
2019 08 07 HIN-19-003 review transmitted
2019 08 08 MBI 2020 planning, EW Zg CWR comments
2019 08 09 Muon talks, Muon conference CSC meeting, MBI 2019 talks, CSC electronics and CSC aluminum covers
2019 08 12 UW CMS meeting, CSC Eff comparison, Buchanan Thesis Introduction,
2019 08 14 CSC meeting, CSC conference talks
2019 08 15 CSC large covers
2019 08 16 Zhu letter, Buchanan thesis defense
2019 08 19 UW CMS meeting, IPRD CSC talk candidate CSC Eff comparison
2019 08 20 IPRD CSC talk nomination, CSC efficiency plots to group
2019 08 21 CSC meeting, Rivet WZ plots, CSC muon practice talks
2019 08 22 TWEPP CSC poster cancelation
2019 08 23 Rivet questions on WZ+jets binned samples
2019 08 25 MBI talk reviews
2019 08 26 MBI 2019
2019 08 27 MBI 2019, Rivet work overview
2019 08 28 BMI 2019
2019 09 03 CSC efficiency talk review
2019 09 21 Muon News, MCPB report, Muon practice talks, Rivet SMP-18-003 WW
2019 09 22 CMS week schedule, Muon practice talks, MBI 2020 organization, cross section summary plot update, aTGC summary plot update, Revised DOE slideshow to include CSC and my Ph.Ds
2019 09 23 Ho-Fung research inquiry, Rivet SMP-17-001 DY, CSC Efficiency meeting, WZ meeting, ZZ discussion, UW CMS Meeting, VV Rivet question, Isa CSC slides for NEC
2019 09 24 General muon meeting, CSC meeting, CSC IB meeting, Muon IB meeting, CSC efficiency, VBS ZZ optimization, CSC DPG talk, TOP-15-018 IR, SMEFT talk title
2019 09 25 SMP meeting, ARC VBS Zg review, ZZ meeting, ZZ VBS discussion
2019 09 26 ARC EW Zg review, CSC meeting, WZ meeting, VVV EFT discussion, Muon reconstruction talk, US CMS meeting, contacted muon RM
2019 09 27 Reviewed Bs mumu responses, Reviewed RM slides
2019 09 29 SMEFT talk outline
2019 09 30 GMM plot approval, UW CMS meeting, SMEFT talk research
2019 10 01 SMEFT talk
2019 10 02 CSC HFO tests, Rivet MVA discussion, SMEFT workshop talk, SMEFT workshop
2019 10 03 SMEFT workshop, Keegan Rivet study
2019 10 04 SMEFT workshop, SMPCom talk, Tomsk travel situation
2019 10 07 UW CMS meeting, Rivet study results, CSC PM funding issues
2019 10 08 SMPCom EFT talk, Talk questions, EWK WW backgrounds
2019 10 09 CSC Mangers meeting, CSC meeting, ARC EWK Zg status, ARC HIN Z status, HL-LHC muon backgrounds conference proceeding, CSC RM update
2019 10 10 UW CSC meeting, UW VV meeting, CMS RM Update
2019 10 11 ARC HIN Z meeting, RM upgrade update
2019 10 14 UW CMS meeting, RM upgrade update, Rivet VV study. Muon talk and conference proceedings
2019 10 15 RM upgrade update, SMP VV meeting Rivet VV study, ZZ deep core
2019 10 16 Extended technician contract
2019 10 17 UW CSC meeting, UW VV meeting
2019 10 18 FastCSCEff program and ME11a results
2019 10 21 UW CMS meeting
2019 10 22 SMP general meeting, Rivet VV ttbar backgrounds, FastCSCEff ME11a results
2019 10 23 Kenneth email on aC and EFT
2019 10 24 UW CSC meeting, UW VV meeting, Rivet VV ttbar backgrounds, Kenneth email on ZZ progress
2019 10 25 Rivet VV study, EFT meetings
2019 10 28 UW CMS meeting
2019 10 29 SMP VV meeting
2019 10 30 CSC managers meeting, CSC meeting, EWK Vg JEU discussion
2019 10 31 UW CSC and VV meetings, Comments on EPS CSC poster
2019 11 01 CSC me11a efficiency vs pt problem, EWK Zg JEU discussion
2019 11 04 UW CMS meeting, Zg aTGC issue, CSC me11a efficiency vs pt problem, Rivet VV review of samples and analysis cuts
2019 11 05 Zg aTGC issue meeting, CSC me11a efficiency vs pt problem
2019 11 06 CSC me11a efficiency vs pt problem
2019 11 07 UW CSC meeting CSC me11a efficiency vs pt problem, UW VV meeting WZ status
2019 11 11 US CMS meeting
2019 11 12 SMP VV meeting, APS abstracts, review NEC conference proceeding
2019 11 13 CSC managers meeting, CSC meeting, NEC conference proceedings
2019 11 14 UW CSC meeting, UW VV meeting
2019 11 15 Grad student presentation, CSC manpower email
2019 11 17 Parker recommendation and advice
2019 11 18 UW CMS meeting, CSC efficiency test run ntuples, CSC manpower volunteer
2019 11 19 SMP meeting, SMP Com meeting, CSC efficiency after HV run ntuples
2019 11 20 CSC managers and general meeting, CSC efficiency after HV run ntuples
2019 11 21 Muon RM meeting, CSC efficiency after HV run ntuples
2019 11 22 CSC cooling loan information, EWK Zg CCLE review
2019 11 25 UW CMS meeting, CSC efficiency memory lead discussion, CSC student help, SMP VV meeting EFT discussion
2019 11 26 CSC efficiency fiducial efficiencies, CSC, efficiency post HV bug fix results, CSC efficiency full dataset problems, Downham statement comments
2019 11 27 CSC meeting, CSC efficiency fiducial discussion, RM Tomsk loan inquiry
2019 11 28 CSC RM Tomsk loan reply, HIN IR
2019 11 29 Downham recommendation, CSC efficiency ntuples, CSC RM Tomsk loan reply, HIN comments, CSC RM manpower database
2019 11 30 CSC RM manpower database, Downham recommendation final
2019 12 01 Downham recommendation final transmit
2019 12 02 UW CMS meeting, CSC Eff y fiducial
2019 12 03 CSC Eff y fiducial discussion, Tomsk VTTx loan
2019 12 04 CSC General and managers meeting, CSC Eff y fiducial discussion, EW Zg ATLAS comparison, CSC Eff job memory management
2019 12 05 UW CSC meeting and CSC Eff job memory management
2019 12 06 EW Zg comment, EW Zg proceed to FR
2019 12 07 CSC Eff x and y fiducial discussion
2019 12 09 UW CMS meeting, RM budgets, RM manpower updates, RM VTTx loan
2019 12 10 RM meeting, CSC Eff job memory check suggestions
2019 12 11 RM budget status discussion
2019 12 12 RM budget status discussion, RM budget table update, RM emails on cooling
2019 12 13 RM emails on cooling, RM email on Dubna M&OB
2019 12 14 Book CERN travel
2019 12 15 Submit letters of recommendation
2019 12 16 UW CMS meeting, RM M&OB update loan status
2019 12 18 RM M&OB Dubna status
2019 12 19 RM CSC people BU and Davis
2019 12 20 CSC Front vs back efficiency

2019 01 02

Rivet FSQ-15-006
Plots and possible other material updated
Need to figure out how to trigger new valPlots

Jithin prelim slides
Comments sent
Should add comments about previous results

Andrew prelim slides
Comments previously sent

Organized meetings and tasks

Rivet published analysis are updated
CMS_2018_I1682495, SMP-16-010
CMS_2018_I1653948, FSQ-15-005
CMS_2018_I1680318, FSQ-16-011

Identified analysis for cross section summary update

Reviewed ssWW scattering NLO QCD paper
Does not actually include NLO EWK
Sent suggested text on NLO EWK corrections

Lemonick email
Responded to email on CF4 use

2019 01 03

WZ EWK paper
Revised NLO EWK correction text

Updated CV
ZZ+jets paper
SM HL-LHC report
Need to update personnel, activities and research statement

Updated xs summary data
tZq 13 TeV update with new result with improved uncertainty
Wc 13 TeV will update reference
HH Comb 13 TeV updated numbers and will update reference

Documented travel schedule

Read ATLAS WZ paper
Less clear on normalization issues than conference paper was

2019 01 04

xs summary
survey of preliminary results
no new results
proceed with updating xs summary plots

EWJ WZ + PS paper
Indicates PS simulation differences are strong on third jet kinematics and jet vetoes
Take away is that there are interesting to measure
ATLAS did not appear to use third jet kinematics or vetoes

LHC EW WG summary
Emphasis on Rivet
EWK WZ comparison is progress
EW NLO is on the way in Matrix
NNLO + PS is also being developed, could have strong effects on low pT cross section, not sure what that means for shape or total cross section

2019 01 07

UW CMS meeting
Need to review prelims, thesis's in progress
Need to understand Stephen's schedule
Need to monitor RU CSC cement builder situation
Need to setup WZ meeting
Need to consider WZV sensitivity, perhaps using Rivet-VV sensitivity project

2019 01 08

SMP VV meeting
Wg presentations
Very tight uncertainties using simplified Wg mass fit
watch to see how they evolve

aTGC conversions
D6 to LEP conversions sent to Andrew Levin

Paper reading
Ellis on future colliders
Riva ZZ Zg aTGC using polarization from angular distributions
ZZ FTR study with longitudinal polarization from angular distributions

cross section summary plot update
Updated 13 TeV tZq and 13 TeV HH combination
tZq, better result and reference for submitted paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.05900
HH combination, reference for submitted paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/1811.09696

2019 01 09

RU segment builder tests
Suggested running on failed events files

2019 01 10

RU segment builder tests
Recovers failed events, need to run on larger statistics

xs Summary plots: EWK WZ
Updated cross section, closer to theoretical prediction
Updated ratio plot
Need to update refs, main xs plot, commit plots and code

FSQ-15-006 Rivet
Reviewed update code and plot
New version seems to correct differences with publication plots
Figure titles improved
Given write access for labels
Updated from L2 PAG pending to L2 PAG approved
Now pending publication at which point the references in info file will have to be updated

2019 01 11

RU segment builder tests
May only address found LCT - failed offline segment cases
Run on data with improved LCT performance

xs summary WZ results
Updated luminosity uncertainty
Will update main xs summary and ratio plot
Will update plots and references

Andrew's and Jithin's prelim drafts
Reviewed and sent comments

2019 01 14

UW CMS meeting

CV update
Added EWK Inclusive reference

Muon meetings
Weekly and CSC electronics
Chamber extraction scheduled
ME-1/1/16 on Jan 22

2019 01 15

WZ EWK and Inclusive results in xs and aC plots
Updated WZ incisive luminosity error and statistical uncearinty
Updated EWK WZ cross section
Produced cross section plots: diboson summary, EWK summary, main xs summary
Update references and plots
Updated aTGC plot dates and references
Updated aQGC plots with results, dates and references

Updated CV with WZ references and descriptions of work
Senka Duric: aTGC in WZ inclusive and EWK papers
Kenneth Long: EWK WZ paper

2019 01 16

Triple top paper
NP must be neutral current flavor violating

Thesis update
4 chapter to review for Buchanan
1 chapter reviewed and 3 chapters to review for Long

Rivet progress
Added myself as assignee for several analysis

SMP-17-002
No rivet merge request yet
Questions on HEPData entries

WIP: SMP-17-010
https://gitlab.cern.ch/cms-gen/Rivet/merge_requests/134
Differential Z cross sections
Validation requested
Validation plots look bad, monitor

SMP-17-001
https://gitlab.cern.ch/cms-gen/Rivet/merge_requests/127
Differential DY cross section
PAG L2 Approved
Waiting for publication and final update to info file
Submitted Dec 27th

FSQ-15-006
https://gitlab.cern.ch/cms-gen/Rivet/merge_requests/133
Diffractive energy flow
PAG L2 Approved
Waiting for publication and final update to info file
Submitted Dec 12th
Questions on HEPData entries

SMP-17-003
https://gitlab.cern.ch/cms-gen/Rivet/merge_requests/83
Jet thrust
Waiting for replies to comments made by Rivet conveners

SMP-16-01
https://gitlab.cern.ch/cms-gen/Rivet/merge_requests/90
Decided plots are good enough
L2 PAG approved, Paper is published, waiting for merge

SMP-16-015
https://gitlab.cern.ch/cms-gen/Rivet/merge_requests/86
Plugin nearly ready and self validated by Philippe Gras <noreply@cern.ch>
Should validate plots
Should review plugin

SMP-14-022
https://gitlab.cern.ch/cms-gen/Rivet/merge_requests/132
Anastasia committed
No plots yet, no good model to compare to
Rivet conveners have commented
Need to figure out how to get moving

SMP-14-012
https://gitlab.cern.ch/cms-gen/Rivet/merge_requests/82
Review plots
Check validation * Ping Josh on whether the solution of post FSR was good enough

2019 01 18

CSC Team meeting

Discussed RU segment builder results
Could not understand numerators or denominators of efficiencies presented
Would like to understand if expected improvement is seen on first 100 events and if they are special in any way

Discussed status of ongoing CSC Efficiency Project

CSC Efficiency work
- Understand RU vs. ST results
- Understand selection used for 8000 failed event file
  - Details of selection
  - What percentage is the failures of the total number in ME1/1a
    This should match our typical 7% fail 93% percent pass rate
  - Of the 8000 how many pass:
    - Using standard RU, should be 0%
    - Using improved RU
    - Using ST
  - Separately what is the effect in a general sample of events.
  - Comment: There has been a lot of discussion about these samples are the results and I've become confused on what samples we are talking about and what numbers we are comparing.  Stephen should pull together all the number and notate them carefully with his best understanding of what they mean.
  - Assuming that we have still have a problem after solidifying our understanding of the numbers.
    - Understand our result relative to CSCVal result that indicated higher ST efficiency
    - Does the new RU code have the effect we expect on the sample the RU authors used to improve the code.
    - Is there something special about the samples we are using for finding problems or testing the efficiency.  For instance, very high instantaneous luminosity

- Next highest priority projects
 - Reposit CSC Efficiency code in CMSSW
 - Include code, python scripts and documentation
 - Interact with Tim Cox to determine best place for the code
 - Also include python scripts and instructions for reprocessing (Isa)


- Lower priority issues
 - Coordinate with DPG group to integrate our efforts in better with them and understand if there are other issues or priorities to work on.
 - Front vs back efficiency issues
 - Possible issues with how intersection with CSC components are done in tag and probe
 - Folding vs phi to investigate intra chamber efficiency vs phi
 - Efficiency vs instantaneous luminosity
 - Time history over 2018
 - Full analysis of 2018 data

- Issues to be resolved before the start of Run 3
 - Ability to run code on MC to test functionality
 - Ability to run code on cosmic data to test functionality.
 - Resolve 20% failure of jobs issue

2019 01 18

CSC needs a CPT7 board and crate for GBTx testing either at CERN, BU or OSU
BU and OSU options are preferred because of proximity to vender
Testing with current type of boards difficult at BU
Sridhara says this would be easy to provide at CERN where 901 already has:
CPT7 board and crate with controlling PC with software

2019 01 22

CSC Efficiency RU segment builder
Asked for further clarification from Steven on numerators and denominators of segment builder study

2019 01 24

UW CMS meeting

Andrew prelim
passed

2019 01 25

CSC team meeting

CSC Ru segment builder study
Found LCT but no segment 3.5% - this is likely the maximum improvement
No LCT or segment 3.5% - data is likely not taken so this can't be improved
Segment found but no LCT, data on other side was probably found by trigger
Would like to process 7000 failed event to see effect and also understand effect on first 100

Jithin prelim
passed
Need to improve preparation of our students starting with Stephen

CPT7 board and crate for GBTx testing
Put Darien Wood and Tom in contact

Accepted to be chair of ARC for SMP-18-007 VBS Zg

2019 01 28

UW CMS meeting

WZ Run 2 analysis
2017 MC NJet distributions look wrong, peak at NJet = 1 or 2
Both inclusive and jet binned samples
Data looks okay
Sridhara Suggested on 2016 vs 2017 comparisons
Asked for information on jet kinematics
Suggested concentrating on Inclusive sample where problem is more obvious and normalization is simpler

VV Rivet analysis
ZZ Rivet compilation problems
Indicated how to make clean and force further cleaning

CSC Val MC slides
Large improvement to stage and ring labeling and normalizations

CSC DPG and R&D milestones
Will try to complete CSC Efficiency studies by March 15th
Will try to complete Neutron background studies by the Dec 1st

2019 01 29

SMP VV meeting
EWK Zg pre approval
pre approved with many conditions
may not be ready for review yet
still need to organize the ARC

CSC Electronics meeting minutes on CPT7 GDBx testing
Minutes made situation clearer.
We already have a CPT7 test stand for GEM at CERN
Need is for a BU or OSU based stand near the vender

2. GBTX Testing Development at BU [Indara Suarez]

Background: OSU bench tests to no exercise GTBx communication on
xDCFEBs. BU is developing test stand for GBTx. Meanwhile, we have been
doing this testing at CERN with a CTP7 in one of the GEM uTCA test
stands.

BU setup has an FC7 in a regular uTCA crate, connected to DCFEB. Als
have USB-computer connectors for GBTx i2c configuration and uploading
xDCFEB f/w via Impact. Have set up and run the VLCB@BU (GBTx evaluation
kit) and are learning how to load config into GBTx via i2c. Next step is
to move to xDCFEB + FC7 setup. BU engineer X. Wu is writing FC7 f/w to
communicate with GBTx and exercise eLink I/O. Ben has written firmware
for xDCFEB to interact with GBTx to verify connectivity between GBTx and
FPGA.

Status: FC7 is set up to write config registers and registers for GBTx.
Needed to write some basic software to send buffer from FC7 to GBTx.
This week did loopback tests with FC7.

Discussion: Since BU test stand is not ready, in the short term we are
sending xDCFEBs to CERN. Evaldas and Yacine can do GBTx tests in B904
with CTP7 from GEM and existing f/w and s/w. But in the longer term, we
want to test the GBTx before shipping to CERN in case there are problems
that need to be fixed. "Plan A" was for BU to ship their small uTCA
crate, FC7 and all f/w and s/w to OSU so tests could be done there. A
quicker path may be to use CTP7 instead of FC7 because f/w and s/w
exist. Need to find out if BU mini-uTCA crate can support CTP7. Also, we
noted that the FC7 is a dead-end development path, while the CTP7 is
used in GEMS and its ATCA successor is the future choice for the CSC
backend. We will investigate if Wisconsin can lend us a CTP7 for these
tests.

CSC Val comparison of MC samples
Emailed MC experts to ask for updated geometry with High Precision neutron background simulation
Needed to make a clear comparison to old geometry with HP neutrons
with HP neutrons is considered far superior
Also volunteered to circulate some slides or make a presentation

2019 01 30

ZZ HEPData
Updated entry with comments implemented
Submitted for review

CSC Val comparison of MC samples
Comments on slides to prepare for circulation to MC experts
Suggested comparison to data

2019 01 31

ZZ HEPData
Updated entry with comments on significant figures implemented
Submitted for review

CSC Val comparison of MC samples
Comments on slides to prepare for circulation to MC experts

2019 02 01

CSC Team meeting

CSC team meeting 1 Feb 2019

CSC Efficiency Project: Stephen and Isa

first 100 2018A events
  - First 100 2019A events spread out over many runs
  - Still show improvement with improved RU
  - 2018D event show no overall improvement and no special improvement
    on first 100 events
  - These events are special for some reason we don't understand

2018 overall efficiencies
  - Need to develop exclusion lists for 2018B and 2018C, Stephen will start
  - Ask Tim and Indara whether we want any time segmentation
    - before and after voltage changes
    - different periods
    - other changes
  - March 15th seems feasible

Current monitoring Jithin
  - Jithin is processing 4 more runs
  - Only takes a few days to process a full year
    - More time to analyze the data
  - Will investigate wether more automation is possible
    - Fits in rings with poor current granularity are problematic
    - Otherwise automation should be possible

Neutron background studies He
  - Completed Default geometry with HP neutron simulation vs
    updated geometry with no HP neutron simulation
  - Will transmit slides to MC group and others
    - Emphasize more statistids would be useful
    - Emphasize HP neutron with updated geometry would be useful
  - Study spot on vs. chamber plots with large occupancy

LS2 CSC stutus Isa
  - P5 activities going well
  - Waiting for RP evaluation of chamber electronics

ZZ HEPData
Updated entry with comments figure caption units
Remove units from phi and eta plots
Technically incorrect but consistent with paper

CSC Val MC comparisons responses
Samples with more statistics and Updated cavern geometry with HP neutron model should be coming soon

2019 02 03

Developed list of Grad Admits with CMS interest and additional useful committee work and application information

2019 02 04

CSC performance plots for 2018
Will use 2018 pre HV change for official plots
Will prioritize 2018 post HV changes
Will produce 2018B and 2018C. Should set march 15th as goal

RU segment builder
RU authors see this as a good result since there changes were more aimed at pathological cases with high occupancy or poor chi2

CPT7 GBTx testing issue
Worried about sufficient expert manpower for testing at BU or OSU

Run 2 EWK WZ
Pinged emphasized important of EWK+2jet plots

Grad Admits with CMS interest list
Sent to colleagues

HEPData ZZ
Discussion about couplings label
Appropriate for vertex model and nomenclature used in original paper by Bauer and Rainwater
Entry finalized and available
Sent to interested ATLAS person

UW CMS meeting

2019 02 05

Neutron background MC comparisons
Send plots
Commented on need for statistics, especially for neutron backgrounds

Muon conference committee
Agreed to be contact for muon conference committee

WZ HEPData
Completed and tested WZ entry

Asked for WZ Rivet routine
Kenneth transmitted directories

Muon institution list
Updated CSC list
CSC part of list complete

2019 02 06

Muon conference committee
Studied muon conferences
EPS is likely target for specific talks
Other conferences may be targets for specific talks
General talk at tracker conference
Materials specific talk for radiation and materials conference
Would like to update web resources including
- Upcoming conferentes
- Abstract database
- Previous talks

P5 and SX5 visit
Chambers extracted on on opposite side
Chamber are radioactive enough to need supervised area designation, later expanded to whole SX5 lab area
Irradiation at Russian facility was continuous while simultaneously operating electronics
GIF++ irradiation could not be done simultaneously with muon beam and data readout

SMP-18-007 ARC organization
Discussed and targeted review for one week from Friday.

SMP meeting
Discussed NLO EWK and NLLO correction and impact on analysis presented

2019 02 07

Black article
Added outreach material

Grant financial database
Setup access

CSC meeting
With Armando and Isabelle
Plan for scientist position possible for Isa. Idea supported by DOE. Discussed with Sridhara also
Plan for wrap-up of Efficiencies studies and Stephen's transition to analysis
Plan for current studies. Should move to larger scale studies

2019 02 08

Muon institution author list complete

Meeting on CSC Efficiency progress
Will concentrate on 2018d.
Compare before and after HV change and then combine to form official plots
Emphasis also on documentation
Spin off other 2018 measurement to He and I

Grad student week CMS slides
Updated with new analysis material for VV, DM, tautau
Tulika and Kevin later updated hardware slides
One more update needed for CSC names

2019 02 09

ZZ analysis
Reviewed ZZ analysis AN
Comments on areas problematic for ARC review and pre-approval

2019 02 11

UW CMS meeting

ZZ analysis
Systematic uncertainty discussion
Concentration on lepton Id

SMP nomination
Sent responses

2019 02 12

ZZ pre-approval
Pre-approval slides and work was very substandard
Group leaders didn't seem to care
Starting to push to do better work

CSC finances and parts status, 12 th and 13th
Discussion with Aimee
Understood current financial status
Have slightly overspent money. However, this is okay as long as new SOW is know to be on the way
May have to request more money
Discussed situation with Armando
Discussed with Dick
Developed more careful accounting which matches above and Armando's and Dick's accounting
Flow restrictors arrive at UW
Waiting for shipping schedule for PADS
Waiting for final estimate for covers

2019 02 13

CSC finances and parts status, 12 th and 13th
See above

ZZ CMS/ATLAS comparison
Discussed comparison with Stefan Richtor
Can't provide more detained information in eluding correlations

2019 02 14

ZZ polarization
Studied papers and talks
Polarization looks like a very good topic
ZZ polarization is simple at LO and has a clear energy dependence
NLO treatment which can mix polarizations should be interesting eventually
Fully reconstructed mode should make analysis straightforward

ZZ Rivet
Investigating installation issues

2019 02 15

CSC team meeting
make minutes

ZZ analysis
Comments on updated note
Problem since it makes it look like we are including real uncertainties on final measurement

SMP-18-007 review
Comments from other reviews sent
Send my own comments
Need to revisit fake photon id
Need to setup ARC author meeting

New neutron background sample to validate
Initial results make it obvious this is updated and fixed cavern geometry and neutron background sample
Initial comparison indicates neutron background sample dominates and more statistics need for geometry comparison
There are slight differences that may be more interesting with more statistics
Need to compare ME3/1 where there may be a relevant geometry change

MBI organization
Held first meeting
Might like slot for polarization results
Need to make first draft of experimental agenda

2019 02 18

UW CMS meeting
CSC efficiency measurements progressing slowly

2019 02 19

ZZ analysis goals
Load out goals
order 2-3 % measurement
Improvements in lepton ID uncertainty and luminosity uncertainty
Document this better in AN

ZZ luminosity uncertainty
Studied luminosity POG notes
New high precision result for 2015-16. Order 1.5%
Two categories of uncertainties.
Normalization, correlated between years
Integration, uncorrelated

2019 02 20

Detailed luminosity uncertainty
Propose treating integration uncertainties as uncorrelated
Issue with high precision cross constraint on normalization uncertainties?
Luminosity POG suggest just taking 1% as uncorrelated

         normalization     integration   total
2015:  2.3%                  1.4%            2.7%  LUM-15-001
2016:  1.5%                  2.0%            2.5%  LUM-17-002
2017:  1.5%                  1.7%            2.3%  LUM-17-004
2018:  2.1%                  1.4%             2.5%  LUM-18-002 going to pre approval

or if we can use LUM-17-003 a new precision determination for 2015-2016
2015:  0.9%                  1.3%           1.5%  LUM-17-003 going to pre approval
2016:  1.1%                  0.9%           1.4%  LUM-17-003 going to pre approval


Notes:
Normalization and integrations uncertainties are uncorrelated with each other.
Normalization uncertainties should be taken as correlated with each other between years.
Integration uncertainties should be taken as uncorrelated with each other between years.
I use the result of LUM-17-003 that the dead time uncertainty is uncorrelated between years and include it with integration uncertainties as they do.

Of course we would need corresponding integrated luminosities.

2019 02 21

SMP nomination
Progressed to next level nomination process

Neutron background studies
Transmitted results of cavern comparison with neutron background simulation on
Commented to analyszing
- data with CSCValidation
- data with full neutron background code

2019 02 22

CSC team meeting
Need update on CSC parts status from Dick
need to look for new meeting time

CSC Efficiencies: Stephen
Most post HV change data processed
Pre HW change data 60%  processed
Will produce plots after sufficient data processed


Current monitoring: Jithin
Produce averages over phi and many fills dividing radially or in eta
  - Try just averaging data in phy and over fills for chambers with low
    current and current granularities

Neutron backgrounds
  - Analyzed new fixed cavern geometry file
    - results dominated by neutron background model
    - small changes in level of activity
    - Not enough data to spot any problem in phi/2D
    - Can't see significant differences due to cavern geometry
    - Probably UCLA neutron background study is still the best
       indication that the level of activity is accurately simulated by
       when using the high precision neutron background model
  - MC group would like comparison with data and 2D (ring or r vs phi) plots
    - Will wait for larger MC samples
    - Will look into processing a data file using CSCValidation
    - Will work on running neutron background code

MBI organization
Try to get triple VVV talk

2019 04 07

Read EWK WZ correction paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.00882
Covers EWK and QCD NLO corrections
Complete treatment of diagrams except photon initial state diagrams
Predicts -16% cross section and 4 to 20% differential effects
Uses CMS loose fiducial region
We don't give a number that could be directly compared

IR SUS-18-007
Reviewed paper and submitted comment from the UW group

Email to Marcus on how to access rivet merge request code

2019 04 08

Rivet code access
add "diffs" to end of merge request address

UW CMS meeting
Stephen synchronizing with Hassan's code base

ZZ polarization
Discussed with Usama variables needed for polarization analysis

EWK Zg review scale and acceptance
Posed question on scale uncertainty
Can some combinations of renormalization and factorization scale lead to anti correlated behavior of the QCD Zg + 2jet background at low and high m_jj
Asked about theory uncertainty on fiducial cross section. Should be small

2019 04 09

Muon meetings
General muon meeting
CSC general meeting
Discussion of cooling issues
Finishing CSC installation is critical path
Believe that cooling problems could effect a maximum of a few chambers
Improve epoxy jacket to prevent cracking of brasings. Though doesn't stick to pipe well
Install water sensor jacket loops
Have approved with RP procedure to replacing loop. Violated PR rules with the last replacement!

ZZ polarization
Sent detailed instructions to Usama
Partially based on work in: https://cds.cern.ch/record/1200447/files/ATL-PHYS-SLIDE-2009-217.pdf

Here is a link to a useful talk on ZZ polarization.  I may have sent it before.

https://cds.cern.ch/record/1200447/files/ATL-PHYS-SLIDE-2009-217.pdf


Slide 4 shows the definition of the polarization angle.
They define the angle it in the qqbar CM frame (same as the ZZ CM frame).  However, the Z bosons should have longitudinal or transverse polarization in any frame.  So you can do it in the lab frame and you will just find slightly different fractions.  Claude Charlot pointed out to me that if you do it in the lab frame you don’t incur additional systematic uncertainties and extra difficulties in unfolding.

Slide 7 shows the polarization distribution in the variable cos(theta) which is what we will want to unfold and/or fit.  At leading order the function and very simple.

Slide 8 and 15 show what these distributions might look like after combined and then with acceptance and reconstruction.

Slide 21 shows the expected polarization distributions as a function of energy and what a 100fb-1 measurement might look like.   In Lab frame this would be slightly changed but not very much since the direction of the Z boson in ZZ CM frame and lab frame will usually be the same.

As you can see we really should be able to show that the polarization fraction changes with energy with the largest transverse contribution coming right above threshold.

In the end from your side all we would need is for you to include the cos(theta) variable for both Z bosons and possibly unfold it.   Just the distribution would not be enough since we need to plot or bin it against m_ZZ.

EWK Zg review scale and acceptance
Soem scale choices do lead to anti correlated behavior of the QCD Zg + 2jet background at low and high m_jj
Authors will try two separate uncertainties, one correlated and one anti-correlated
Asked for several people's opinions - Kenneth thought this was a reasonable idea
Mistakes made in acceptance calculation. Acceptance difference to the fiducial region is small. Efficiencies are 50-70%

Muon conference committee organization
Came up with plan of action.

Hi Armando and Robin,

Matt and I have met and discussed some ideas about how to organize our work on the CSC abstract submission for conferences. We came up with a plan, and would like to get your feedback (and help) on it. The goal is to maximize conference participation and visibility for people working on the CSC system, especially for young people.

Here are the main ideas that we are thinking about:

1. Prepare a set of abstracts that will cover most situations for the coming year and use them as needed. These should be of top quality and we should get input from various CSC experts on how to make them as effective as possible. Our initial guess as to the content of these abstracts is
a. An overall abstract covering the highlights of CSC upgrades, R&D, performance, and future
b. An abstract on the CSC electronics upgrade
c. An abstract on detector ageing, including studies of eco gases
d. An abstract on detector performance in Run 2 and in the future

We would like to get your input on whether this set of basic abstracts seems about right to you (do that span the space), and whether there is another way to organize them that you think would be better. We know that Armando and others have been submitting abstracts. We should collect all of these and integrate the ideas so that we get the best of everything.

2. Identify potential speakers in the CSC group so that we have a picture of who is interested in giving talks. This would involve sending out a message to the CSC hn forum every so often and making announcements in the CSC meetings about upcoming conferences.

3. Prepare a Google doc listing conferences where we have submitted abstracts, which of the abstracts were accepted, and who gave the talk. We think that it will be helpful to have a record of how we are doing over time. We would also identify future conferences of interest and include them somewhere on this doc.

4. Practice talks in meetings advertised to the CSC group or even in CSC meetings. We think that integrating the preparation of talks into the culture of the CSC group could be productive.

5. A Twiki page collecting information that can be used by CSC speakers, including approved plots. Our understanding is that there is some sort of page now, but that it is not very up to date.

So those are the main ingredients of our plan. We also have a procedure of the workflow as we understand it:

1. Boris highlights conferences of interest and informs us
2. Matt and Jeff agree on which conferences would be good targets and which abstracts would be appropriate for these conferences. We can cc Armando or any other people on our final assessment.
3. One of us submits the abstracts to CINCO
4. Advertise the conference+abstract to the CSC group (should we only do this once the abstract is accepted?)

In this discussion, it came up that the GEM group sometimes submits a large number of abstracts to a given conference. We are concerned that this large number could make it more difficult for the single abstract that we might submit to get noticed. We are wondering whether there should be any coordination across the different parts of the muon system on an abstract submission strategy. It might also be good to have a really good abstract covering the entire CMS muon system.

Another question is to what extent any of this should be coordinated/discussed with the muon DPG and POG. We clearly want to emphasize hardware, but sometimes the distinction is blurry and it can be good to integrate material in a way that is most interesting.

I remember from talking with Robin at the last CMS meeting, and she said that the CSC upgrade has a really "compelling story." It would be great if Robin could outline the main elements of this story and how they could be included in our abstracts.

Any and all advice and suggestions would be very much appreciated!

2019 04 10

Reviewed and send comments on Long's thesis

Reviewed Rivet routine for SMP-16-015
Made comments

Rivet organization
Reviewed all current analysis and categorized between what is in progress, stalled and to be done by me

2019 04 11

SMP meeting
Talk on scale uncertainties and generator comparisons for different R jets was interesting
PS now generally agrees with higher order correction with NNLO giving a good result
PS uncertainties are small and completely covered by scale uncertainties
Small R jets have larger unceratainites

EWK Zg review scale and acceptance
Concluded scale uncertainty study
Having two scale uncertainties does not make a large effect
Mistake in the Zg cut led to depopulating the low m_jj region. New result is better
Explained expectation for theoretic uncertainty on well chosen fiducial region

CINCO MBI CMS talks
Entered all MBI talk in CINCO
Need to advertise MBI and talks
Need to book travel

Rivet prioritization
Went through all high priority items on Rivet priorities list
Most more recent analysis done or in progress
Went through all new analysis
Made contact requires for new analysis

Muon IB meeting

2019 04 12

EWK Zg review ARC status
Authors answered final questions
Scale uncertainty issue still open
Asked authors to update documentation
Asked ARC about scale uncertainty issue and whether they wanted a video meeting

Rivet plugin contact requests
W_C, Contacted Authors Conntact:
Contact: svenja.karen.pflitsch@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch
Working on thesis, might take some time

US CMS meeting travel
Need to book hotel

2019 04 13

Muon conference committee plan comments
Armando requests more specific abstracts
and suggests advertising for speakers as early as possible

H + jets cross section summary
Entered new data
Need new theory cross sections
Contacted lead author

EPR pledges
Pledged effort for Herndon and He. Others already entered

Rivet WZ plugin
Downloaded VBS study plugin
Installed CMS Rivet code package
Needed ARCH redefine, kinit to CERN email, set git config email to CERN, obscure command for kinit
git config --global http.emptyAuth true
May have to set email back to hep for SummaryPlots
Successfully compiled

2019 04 15

UW CMS meeting

2019 04 16

xs summary Higgs+jets
Received results from Authors. Will include in plot

Kenneth defense practice

2019 04 17

Move to using CMS software and MC for Rivet VV project
Kenneth assisting Keegan

Kenneth thesis defense
Thesis successfully defended

2019 04 18

Muon CSC meeting
Within meeting with RPC monitoring code authors
Stephen on shift
Stephen processing 2018D data without ME1/1 rings

Zg clarify publication strategy
Will publish on 2016 data with standard aTGC and xs

2019 04 19

Transverse momentum re summation paper
https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.08325
WZ results presented with no comparison to other levels of calculation or data

2019 04 22

UW meeting

Keegan ZZ cross section results
First results for QCD ZZ cross section
Cross section too large, muon selection looks problematic

Dosimeter documentation for Isa

2019 04 23

HEPData EW WZ
Received comments
Will implement later

2019 04 25

UW Muon meeting

CSC efficiencies
Issues with linux operation system change

Current vs charge relationships
Test new ideas for fitting data
Spatial density analysis - much faster than chi-sq technique to extract shapes / deviations from linearity

neutron background code
Getting back to this
Revising UCLA code with code from CSCValidation

Muon Conf TWEEP abstract
Consider whether to submit one or two abstracts

2019 04 29

UW CMS meeting

EFT Zg model
Neutral model available from Celine Degrande
Only one viable non CP violating parameter
Some CP violating parameters
ATLAS has been probing CP violating parameters

Submitted Muon TWEPP Abstract

2019 04 30

Muon TWEPP Abstract
Updated to match length constraints

aQGC plots
Updated with submitted EW WZ results

2019 05 02

UW muon meeting

CSC efficiencies done

ME1/1 reinstallation restarted with addition of lead detector cables
ME234/1 preparation started

Question on field in GEM
Are high magnetic field tests necessary for GE1 or 2 chambers
Were these done for CSC

2019 05 03

Comments addressed on CMS-SUS-18-005,

DPF gas and aging abstract
Good abstract submitted
Added to abstract collection

2019 05 06

UW CMS meeting,

EPS CSC talk downgraded to poster
Contacted conference committee. Will keep the poster and search for a speaker since it can easily be canceled later

2019 05 08

Rivet to HepData conversions,
No available conversion since HEPData has more metadata
There does seem to be some desire to create this tool
Conversion the other way available through HEPData download

CSC electronics upgrade abstract
Jeff will take current abstract and improve

2019 05 09

UW muon meeting

2019 05 10

UW muon meeting minutes


Efficiencies for stages 2,3, and 4 look good.   Efficiencies for stage 1 are systematically low by a fraction of a percent.  
The uncertainties indicate the low efficiency is significant, though not highly significant.   Our expectation is that this 
would not effect the overall muon reconstruction efficiency very much, though it might effect the momentum resolution 
which would in turn effect things like the trigger rates and efficiencies for muons near the trigger threshold.

We would like to improve our understanding of this effect by doing the following things.

1) Combine ME1/1A and ME1/1B since they look consistent.

2) For the combined ME1/1 or the ME1/2 and ME1/3 histograms decrease the number in bins by a factor of 2 or 4 by 
combining bins.

Note: root has functions for combining histograms or bins so it should be possible to do this without rerunning.

3) For ME1/1, ME1/2 and ME1/3 try fitting this data to see if this results in smaller uncertainties and reduced dependence 
on any outliers.  You could use the results of either step 1 or 2, whichever looks better and gives the best fit result.

4) Understand in general what is the loss of momentum resolution for a muon without a segment in the first muon stage.

2019 05 13

EPS poster issue
Need to find speaker for poster

general VBS cuts
Suggested what generalized cuts might look like to Keegan

Call EW Zg ARC Author meeting

2019 05 14

EPS poster issue Isa
Isa had volunteered but urged her to drop since it is a

*Review Usama LHCP VV talk

2019 05 15

EW Zg ARC author meeting and minutes

We held the meeting this morning and the authors presented the final status of their studies.   In general the conclusions were:

1) The procedure for constraining the QCD Zg +2jet background looks good and also it was well motivated to revise the analysis in this way.
Note: Andrew might want to add some additional comments QCD Zg +2jet background.

2) The acceptance relative to the fiducial cross section definition now seems to be better defined.  As a result the extrapolation to the fiducial 
region is very small and the theoretical uncertainty on that extrapolation is correspondingly small. 
We decided that the analysis is ready to be unblinded.   
We asked the authors to do the following things after unblinding.

1) Detail the results of the unblinded fit including the cross section measurement and the full set of impacts from the fit.
In addition specifically compare the result of the constraint on the QCD Zg +2jet background and its uncertainty to the theoretical NLO 
K-factor to make sure the background and fit is behaving as expected.

2) Expand the detail in the fiducial cross section to include or reference (if it’s elsewhere in the note) the full set of cuts and any necessary 
information about the lepton or photon selection.

2019 05 16

Data/MC CSC comparison
Advised He to use Zskim

produced aC plot including CMS WV
Some info

UW muon meeting

2019 05 17

aC summary plots
consistent alpha sin2theta at mZ

HFO status
Asked questions about higher high V working point
This choice should create comparable results to C4F standard working point.

UW muon meeting minutes

I finally located the original numbers I used. They were from the approval talk. https://indico.cern.ch/event/735769/contributions/3038237/attachments/1666803/2676066/WZ_Approval.pdf page 34.
Comparing the EFT numbers to what is in the version that has been approved for publication they are the same so it doesn’t
look like any numbers changed after approval.

However, analyzing the second table, specifically looking at the ratio of the magnitude of the positive and negative values,
it appears the table is actually expected limits. You can see this easily in dgz1 vs cw which is quite assymetric. This was my mistake.

This presents somewhat of a dilemma. I would be reluctant to compute dkz via any method. The limits are quite asymmetric
for cw and there are clearly some correlations between parameters so I do not think any conversion without more information
on the correlations would be reliable. For lz and dgz1 the standard procedure would be to convert using my numbers. This
will make the WZ result look even a bit worse. Though I prefer my conversion since the couplings are chosen to be their
values as evaluated at m_Z which makes sense for physics involving vector bosons.

Hi Paolo,

In this case I took the authors interpretation translation of these parameters. I did this since otherwise the translation of dkz is not trivial
since it depends on two parameters. I think I found those numbers in a talk. I can’t locate that talk - for instance the approval talk
links seem to lead to the wrong approval. However, I recalculated the numbers and it does look like either the numbers have been
updated or they analyzers calculated these numbers slightly differently than I do. Here is my calculation for the simple lz parameter which maps one to one.

lz = cwww * 3/2 * g^2 * mw^2
where g = e/sin(theta_W) = sqrt(0.00781616*4.0*3.14159)/sqrt(0.23126)
lz = -2.0 * 1.5 * (sqrt(0.00781616*4.0*3.14159)/sqrt(0.23126))^2 * 0.080385 * 0.080385 = -0.00823
and
lz = 2.1 * 1.5 * (sqrt(0.00781616*4.0*3.14159)/sqrt(0.23126))^2 * 0.080385 * 0.080385 = 0.00864

Often people come up with slightly different values for these translations depending on which constants they use. My ATLAS counterpart
and I agreed that this set of constants make sense since the W and Z mass are well defined and measured and defining g and g’ in terms of
the alpha and the mixing angle makes sense. I’m sure that the basic translation is correct since I took it from the definitive EFT paper,
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1205.4231.pdf, and I can general reproduce the numbers of the analysis groups when they do the translation
themselves. For instance, in the cases where the authors show number in both formats in their analysis note and I can reproduce those
numbers at the 10% level.

Comparing these two cases

WZ: -2.0 to 2.1 or -0.0082 to 0.0086 (my conversion)
EWK qqZW -1.8 to 2.0 or -0.0071 to 0.0076 (authors conversion)

Note the EWK qqZW people give both the EFT and the LEP parameters which is what I showed here. Their calculation seems to be about halfway between yours and mine (looking at the values for the EFT cwww = 2.0).

I can ask the WZ authors if they more recent number in the LEP format. However, that is unlikely to resolve issues at the 10% level.

- cheers - matt

2019 05 18

muon SM nominations
Armando and I support Mary-Cruz
Kevin suports Alexei
Will go with Mary-Cruz

alpha sin2theta at mZ issue
Discussion of the issue, the constance and email to Celine

2019 05 20

UW CMS meeting

EW Zg+2jet unblinded results
Problem with counting experiment used to determine cross section in fiducial region and incompatibility with significance calculation and results

2019 05 21

EW WZ HepData
Comments implemented

updated aC plots constants and new analysis, created EFT aC plot
See summary sent below

Scale variation issue question
asked Michael about situation where different scale variations can lead to substantially different slopes (even negative) in critical variables
He suggested something like our plan to use a second systematic uncertainty with different slope
Also suggested evaluating the impact of each systematic separately and adding results in quadrature

EPS CSC poster
Found volunteer

2019 05 22

EPS CSC poster
Submitted support nomination
Speaker selected

Rivet generator issues
since update
circumvented by moving to CMS framework and pre generated MCs

2019 05 23

He for ME234/1 team
question on WZ aC results
Asked author about EFT vs aC results

EW Zg question review and followup
Required that cross section be measure using same simultaneous fit as was used for significance
Removes discrepancy between significance and dedicated fit

2019 05 24

EW Zg question review and followup

aC plot summary including EFT

Dear All,

I wanted to update this group on progress on the aC summary plots.

I think I have updated with all new results from both collaborations. Also in the course of updating I discovered
that I had missed some vector boson fusion to W and Z aTGC results from ATLAS.

Unfortunately I have not worked on adding information and results with alternate unitarization choices. Instead
I finally finished another item on my to do list which was to produce a charged aTGC plot with results in EFT format.
I append a version of the plot, which is not public yet. There are several items to mention or discuss about this plot.

Notes

In any case where an EFT result exist I use those numbers. This actually catches a few ATLAS cB results that are
left out of other plots.

I convert lz and lg to cwww and dgz1 to cw results where EFT results don’t exist.

Possibly this leads to some small inconsistencies in cases where the authors set their own LEP and EFT limits compared
to what you would get if you converted the LEP results with my constants. Sometimes this is because the authors used
their own constants and in others it is because they ran separate MC models for LEP and EFT limits.

*** A point that should be discussed is what constants should be used to make conversions. I have been using constants
including sin2thw and alpha evaluated at mZ. I think this is appropriate for vector boson physics. However, this might
actually be more a matter of the conventions used in Madgraph or other programs. I asked Celine Degrande for her opinion
but she has not responded yet.

I left out some WZ cb and EWK Z results because they are substantially lower in sensitivity. The criteria I used was to
remove results that are about a factor of 100 less sensitive. Including them would remove all ability to tell the cw and
cwww results apart.

I don’t try to convert any dkz+dgz1 or dkg+dgz1 results to cb since that conversion is not completely trivial. Marc-Andre
and I had previously discussed this and agreed that this type of conversion should not be done unless the full correlation
matrix is available. This is one reason why there are less cb results. Also in general we have the least sensitivity to that
EFT parameter.

I am able to put a few Wg lg<->cwww results in the plot that were not previously compared to most of the other results.

I discovered that I was missing some ATLAS EWK W and Z results. I’ll updated the other plots with these also.

A future project would be to make a C and/or P violating parameter cw~ and cwww~. Only ATLAS has results right now.

2019 05 28

EW Zg scale uncertainty results
Results with "opposite" slopes. Doesn't effect results much

aC alpha sin2theta at mZ
Celine responds that at mZ evaluation is good

ZZ rivet metadata question
ZZ Rivet running in CMS framework with CMS MC
metadata wont effect results so should be able to proceed

2019 05 29

muon SM IB meeting
Mary-Cruz and Alexie forwarded to spokesperson as candidate
No vote other than to approve the list

EW Zg signal in and out of fiducial treatment
Results show minimal difference with standard result
However, the amount of "out of fiducial" signal in the signal region is large
Tested idea from Michael on treating two scale uncertainties separately and adding result in quadrature.
Negligible impact

2019 05 30

EW Zg signal in and out of fiducial treatment
"out of fiducial" signal in the signal region i events from JER and misalignment of jets as VBS

2019 05 31

MBI talks advertise with speakers committee help
Advertised two multiboson talks directly to interested speakers (worked)
Asked for speakers committee help on Higgs VH and HH talk (no luck)

2019 06 03

UW CMS meeting,

First data/MC comparison with HP neutron simulation
MC has significantly more hits. No apparent patterns
Ask for input from Armando and then Tim

Rivet ZZ results
First results, far enough off that there must be problems

* IR for the TOP-18-003 CWR * Request sent to group

2019 06 04

Rivet ZZ results
check jet and lepton cuts

request to give talk at Multibosons At The Energy Frontier workshop July 25 26

EW WZ HEPData changes
Final changes before publications

2019 06 05

EW Zg signal in and out of fiducial treatment an scale variations
Results seem correct
call to ARC for green light

2019 06 06

US CMS meeting

CSC CMS week analysis talk for Stephen

ZZ polarization meeting
need to schedule meeting with He Sascha and myself.

Question on aC results in triboson
Results look correct
full check results and conversions
some adjustments to what is plotted

2019 06 07

US CMS meeting

EW Zg ready for green light after authors update documentation

Discuss new muon abstracts NEC19 and IPRD19
Jeff and Darien will come up with improved electronics abstract

2019 06 08

US CMS meeting

Rivet routines out of jet group
Essentially up to date in my database

2019 06 10

UW CMS meeting

Muon SM manager
Amando nominated as system manager.
IB meeting called

Article on statistics in HEP
https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.12362

LP muon poster notification
Called poster to CSC groups attention

ZZ Rivet
Much closer to correct ZZ selection
Looked up correct cuts using HEPData

2019 06 11

aC D6 vs. D8 interference
Madgraph should have squared and linear interference terms
ATLAS has separated them out
https://atlas.web.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/PHYSICS/PAPERS/STDM-2017-24/
and found negligible contribution from the linear term
This conclusion wont be universal but is probably true in aQGC cases

VV Rivet next steps

) First make a copy of your current Rivet routine.  We may want to go back to this working version that matches 
the published analysis if we find a discrepancy later.  Also we may develop a number of these instances and we may 
want to use so be careful to organize them in such a way that they are easy to find, install and run.

 2) Next we want to see if we can match the QCD ZZ cross section with a VBS selection.  For this I would suggest 
changing to the final analysis selection and seeing if we can match the event yields listed in table 1.   You simply 
multiply the cross section by the amount of data they used in the analysis to get event yields.

3) Make copies of that rivet routine instance once it works.   You might want to check the EW ZZ event yield first.

4) Switch to what we want to use as our default selection that can be applied across all modes and calculate the 
cross section and event yields for 36fb-1.

5) Based on the number of signal and background events calculated an expected significance.   We could do this 
naively just using the uncertainties on the signal and background or use a tool like COMBINE to do it more rigorously 
even using a distribution like m_jj.

6) Recalculate the significance extrapolated to several amount of integrated data.

Full Run 2: 137 fb-1    
Run 2+Run 3: 300fb-1
Run 2-4: 1000 fb-1
Run 2-6: 3000 fb-1

or better yet make a graph going up to 3000fb-1

7) Hopefully then we also have time to move onto several other modes.

EW Zg questions on aQGC limits
Asked why limits worse than the expectation when the EW Zg cross section was found to be small
Asked to see pre vs. post results or nuisance parameter results

2019 06 12

EW Zg updated documentation
Updated by authors
Asked ARC to review for green light

Jet systematics
Paper about Pythia implementation: https://arxiv.org/abs/1605.08352

SMP-16-105 Rivet status
Still in progress

2019 06 13

UW Muon meeting
Data MC CSC comparison
No errors found, large discrepancies still exist

ZZ EW and QCD Rivet
EW ZZ result now works
sent instructions on ZZ QCD Rivet

2019 06 14

NEC 2019 CSC abstract
Submitted CSC electronics abstract with Darien's help

EW Zg reviewed updated documentation
Asked for some updates involving final results

2019 06 17

UW CMS meeting,

Isabelle SIMP progress
Physics coordinator demands progress

ideas for progress in CSC Data MC comparison

The MC sample and the data are supposed to be events with Z’s so I though the normalization should be simple, though there might be a small background in the data.  I made a few suggestions during the meeting and added one here.

1) Check the Z mass peak in the data.  Maybe the way the Z skim is created means there is a background.  We should be able to 
eliminate it by requiring two  muons.   However, I would not think this can make a large difference that leads to less CSC activity by 
such a large amount.

He, this means that you should try to access or create a new loop over muons.  Create a second loop looking for additional muons
 and then reconstruct the two muon invariant mass.   At first make no selection and just plot the result so we can see what we have
 and count how many events would be eliminated by the two muon requirement.   Then after that select on two muon events a mass 
to the Z peak.  Use your judgement on the Z mass cut, but mage it fairly tight.

This might not fix the problem, but it would be good to clear up these issues that might lead to data MC differences.

2) Reread the UCLA neutron background note.  Try to understand if the data and MC are processed in some different way that 
means we have to be more careful about the normalization.   This is work for both He and myself.

3) Get Armando’s opinion on the issue.

TOP-18-003 CWR IR submitted

2019 06 19

EW Zg aQGC comments
Follow up comments to understand fit results
Background gets fit up as well which could strengthen result

WZ talk instructions
Detailed instructions for Stephen

ZZ QCD comparison and selection
First comparison made
Ratios of events are not reliable
Need to concentrate on fiducial cross section

2019 06 20

EW Zg aQGC understood
Fit mainly driven by final high data bin

Question on thermal PAD order status
Sent inquiries

Tenure letter
Agreed to write tenure letter

2019 06 21

EW Zg green light
ARC unanimously endorses green light

CSC Aluminum cover problem
Folding inverted (parity) due to projection used
European vs American
Diagrams clearly labeled
Should be the venders fault

QCD ZZ Rivet scale factors and weights
Results still don't agree at the 25% level
Weights ruled out as an issue with Kenneth's help
Scale factor on gg->ZZ not listed in documentation. Found in pre approval

2019 06 23

Discussion on Muon system manager (with Robin Erbacher)

Large covers
Produced by vender through PSL
European projection led to parity inversion of bending
Still trying to determine how this went wrong
Will remake

2019 06 24

Discussion on Muon system manager (with Robin Erbacher)
Need to follow up with Armando and Sridhara

Follow up on thermal pads
Dick contacted, not responding
Ann contacted. Thermal pads net delivered. Contacting vender, Henkel, for status and tracking information
Follow up with Ann on Wednesday

Comments on CSC poster
Sent comments to Vivan Nguyen on EPS poster

CSC electronics meeting
Overall status seems precarious

CMS meeting day 1
Problems in Muon upgrade status are starting to show up at the top management level
Also many infrastructure problems at P5

UW CMS meeting

2019 06 25

Muon meetings

Muon general meeting
Issues of CSC global upgrade schedule somewhat apparent
Schedule may be extended but no decision till end of November

CSC meeting
Bob Clare made issues of CSC upgrade so far very clear
Strong support for Armando
Discussion of electronics chip power up and other card issues, unsolved
Discussion of green house issues: Baseline performance should be demonstrated and then multi pronged long radiation tests performed
EWK WZ analysis talk

CSC IB meeting
Strong support for Bob Clare as project manager. Will propose to Muon IB
Strong support for Armando
Are the SOWs for this week in order?

Muon IB
Address by spokesperson on muon system manager
Did say anything and skirted real issues behind selection
Where is the money for CSC cooling coming from?

CSC EW WZ talk
Comments sent on talk
Content looked good
Stephen needs coaching to deliver talks better and on advanced physics

EW Zg paper review
Sent comments on paper
English seems fine. Maybe copied from previous publication
Many aspects of paper not updated

Discussion of Muon system manager
Understood Armando's position on system manager issue

Discussion with Bob on long term support for postdocs and students. Bob/DOE seem aware of the problem

2019 06 26

aC plots email
Explained that EFT and other plots are made with physical constants evaluated at mZ
LHCEWWG meeting July 2,3

SMP meeting
EW Zg analysis approved with questions to resolve
e mu region to check fake lepton background contribution
scale variation involve dynamic scale to test interference
Waiting for minutes

Muon system manager discussion
Discussed with Sridhara and Kevin

2019 06 27

EW WZ published and HEPData complete
Published in PLB
HEPData information updated and published

Upgrade plenary
Luminosity talk was interesting

NEC19 CSC talk done
Isa nominated herself and will submit the abstract
Obtain abstract if improved

NEC19 CSC hit reconstruction talk
Armando suggest authors of improved hit reconstruction request a talk

MBI CMS talks
Transmitted speakers for all but Higgs VH HH talk
A good list of speakers this year

EW Zg new results
Fit was done in wrong region
New result, slightly lower cross section

US CMS meeting

2019 06 28

Updated CV
Updated all submitted references

Thermal pads
Arrived at UW

EMU operations budget
Have draft budget
Need to check
Update with GEM information

CSC students
Initiated discussion with Armando on student time commitments

CDF: Assigned W rare decays to review
Have note, full status in two weeks

2019 06 29

Reviewed neutron background note
Focused on normalization issues
Normalize according to instantaneous luminosity by lumi section
Considered all time bins that are looked at
Expect that this is a minor factor if data and MC runs have similar pileup distributions
No obvious normalization factor that has to be applied

Reviewed CSCValidation code
cleaning flag is usually not used
code exists to clean based on muons and CSC hits
standAlone muon code will let you check muon parameters and hits

Suggested checking instantaneous luminosity
Suggested selecting events with muon where one and only one is a CSC muon
May want to select stringently on Z including mass and two well identified muons
May want to histogram that information
Could cause problems in neutron activity actually effects efficiency.

I spent some time today following up on some ideas about why the data and MC don’t compare very well when using the HP neutron
model or even in the case of the regular MC.

I looked through the structure of the CSCValidation Code. I’m worried that due the data and MC datasets we are using that we could
possibly have a comparison where the two datasets have substantially different numbers of muons. I would like you to check and do
the following.

Enable “makeStandalonePlots” plots if you have not done so already to make plots involving standalone muons. Check the number of
muon and the number of CSC hits to make sure they are roughly equivalent.

If we find that they are not equivalent then I want to enable the “cleanEvent” filter. Remove the code that is currently filterEvents code
and instead uncomment the loop over muons and require that there are two muons in the event and that one and only one of them have
CSC hits. I think all the code you would need is there and just needs to be altered slightly to do what you want. The idea is that a typical
Z events will only have two high pT muons and in events where one is pointed into the CSC it’s likely the other is pointed somewhere
else. If there are typically a lot more than two muons in an event I’d like to understand something about those muons in terms of their
pT, eta, and whether they have CSC hits before deciding how to select events.

I also looked again at the UCLA groups note on neutron backgrounds paying special attending to their section on normalizing. They did
carefully normalize by using the average instantaneous luminosity in a luminosity section. However, I suspect that getting this right would
not account for large factors. However, we should probably check what the instantaneous luminosity is in the data and MC to make sure
they are not different by a large amount. They did not discuss any other correction factors that needed to be applied. Checking the
luminosity could be done after the above points.

MBI 2019 announcement
To SMP, SMP-VV and conference committee
Also asked conference committee to advertise the talk

SMP-VV survey
Survey for run 3 analysis
Answered for WZ, ZZ, Zg

2019 07 01

UW CMS meeting

GMM meeting

comments on CSC upgrade poster
sent second round of comments

TWEPP poster
talk downgraded to poster, have to advertise

MBI advertisement
Second advertisement sent to SMP, SMP-VV and conference committee
Requested assistance of conference committee in filling Higgs talk

2019 07 02

September CERN trip book
Booking failed
Now understand that issue is that basic and regular economy codes are the same on international flights
a specialized booking has to be made by an international agent

2019 07 03

CSC meeting

Particle physics reading

2019 07 05

NEC2019 abstract
Submitted CSC hit reconstruction abstract to CMS CINCO
Abstract approved by the CMS conference commitee and submitted to NEC

CMS EMU budget
Pulled up CMS EMU budget, locate in my uw personal financiall information
Appears that thermal pads and covers may not have been processed yet
Contacted Dan: responded that they should be on the May bill. Not processed yet
Contacted Ann about thermal pads
Contacted Dick for overall picture
Armando says some charges may be things purchased for RPC and reimbursed via team account

EW Zg+2j comments
LE approved with minor comments
Sent my comments on several issues that need clarification

2019 07 07

W to charm X GP review
No distributions or results yet.
Essentially only the method and predicted sensitivity is discussed
Monitor and review again later

2019 07 08

UW CMS meeting
Stephens WZ results
NJet still looks bad due to jet cleaning
Recommend pursuing specific candidate events
Keegan VV Rivet progress
WZ looks good except for small discrepancy

Need to understand all muon budget items
Ferguson and Ritter were RPC parts
Digikey is thermal pads
PSL charges understood. End of Junction Box project

EMU SOW
CSC GEM integrated SOW completed

2019 07 09

Muon projects status
Thermal pads shipped to CERN
Waiting for information on aluminum covers

EPS practice talks
held practice talk for Isa and made extensive comments
waiting for a new draft

FNAL diboson talk
Scope expanded to include cross section measurements

multiboson framework being developed by Kenneth for WZ, top and other VV states
Will try it out and keep up to date
Stephen being encouraged to switch to it

2019 07 10

CSC meeting
Once chamber broken
still define the critical path

Muon budget status
Thermal pads and aluminum covers are expenses are in the future and we are about 25k overspend
Once the final understanding is in we will request additional funding

UW CMS students meeting

Keegan VV Rivet progress
With Kenneth's help we have learned that treatment of hard photon radiation and splitting to leptons treatment has changed.
Now they are considered prompt and will fire a lepton veto

2019 07 11

student physics projects
He to work on ZZ/4l, Z boson polarization from Z to 4l, through Higgs, to high mass
Could work on EW ZZ
Stephen making some progress on nanoAOD based analysis

2019 07 12

Keegan Rivet ssWW information,
Pointed Keegan to papers

EW Zg summery plots
Added EW Zg to main cross section summary plot and EW ratio plot
Added to aQGC summary plots
Sent to conveners, no response

2019 07 15

NEC19 CSC data monitoring talk
Facilitated this talk going to the conference

UW CMS meeting
Keegan first progress on ssWW
Stephen trying nonAOD

top IR comments
Received responses, look adequate
Forwarded to group members

2019 07 16

Physics discussion
low mass DM limits
direct experiment pushing down to lower mass - 4 - 5 GeV
We have limits to arbitrarily low mass and should show relevant region below 1 GeV on comparison plot
ATLAS lepton flavor violating analysis of approximately equal sensitivity to ours
the e tau mode is more sensitive which is not understood

2019 07 17

UW CMS student meeting
Keegan
Rivet ssWW results within 5%
Will investigate obvious things and more onto opposite sign WW
Will check if any major background are need for ssWW, opposite sign WW will need top and maybe WZ
Evan
still working on normalization issues
Encouraged him to send cut progression plot when he is confident in it

CSC meeting

W+c summery plot
Added to cross section summary plot
7 and 8 TeV analysis different than 13 TeV analysis.
7 and 9 TeV analysis are traditional W + c jet analysis with 25 GeV jet threshold
13 TeV analysis exclusively reconstructs D mesons and uses a 5 GeV c quark threshold
The difference is clear in the plots
Sent to conveners with explanation and recommendation that this is useful to know but the plot still demonstrates the depth of our X+jets program

2019 07 19

CSC Covers
Expected by the end of next week

2019 07 22

UW CMS meeting
Discussion of mono X MC background differences and k-factors

BPH-16-004 IR request to group
Bs to mumu IR
CWR started, IR due August 5th, UW response by August 2nd

CSC MC muon problems
Can't get muon information to isolate Z events

CSC Covers
Coveres expected at PSL at end of the week
Will ship from there the next week
Pind Dan following Monday

Diboson talk outline
LPC multiboson workshop cross sections talk
Concentrating on interesting aspects with examples

2019 07 23

Diboson talk
LPC multiboson workshop cross sections talk
Wrote slides expect for differential cross section summary and conclusions

2019 07 24

Diboson talk
LPC multiboson workshop cross sections talk
Finished and edited slides

CSC meeting

2019 07 25

Mutiboson workshop,
Diboson talk
LPC multiboson workshop cross sections talk
Added differential cross section summary slide
Edited slides
Gave talk - well received
Useful discussion

2019 07 26

Mutiboson workshop
Reviewed day 2

ttZ cross section
Submitted for publication
measurement and prediction updated
updated main and top cross section plots
need to update references
Will update web pages on Monday

CSC aluminum covers
Discussed in CSC electronics meeting
Should have arrived today
Need to check that there are no inversions compared to the correct design
Does PSL have packing crates
Likely to ship next week

VH HH MBI talk
No UW speaker
Asked another possible speaker

CDF W to D note
Note is latest version

2019 07 29

UW CMS meeting

Muon PM discussion
Clare candidacy, withdrew temporarily due to inability to commit to significant time at CERN beyond first year

EW Zg CWR comments
Reviewed comments
Authors say they can respond in 1 week

VH HH MBI talk
Asked speakers committee if there is leeway on speaker giving talk without losing priority

Safety courses
Several students have missed course
Emphasized importance of showing up for reserved course spots

ssWW Rivet analysis
Advice on selection
Checked on MC samples

thermal pads
Sent inquiry to Dan at PSL

SMEFT workshop
invitation for EWF aC talk
Need to check teaching schedule

2019 07 30

thermal pads
Pads to be received by the end of the week
Crates available for immediate trans shipment

ssWW samples
Asked ssWW group about samples
Received MC list. Sent to Keegan

SMP-VV and SMP-COM nominations
Composed and transmitted response to nomination questions

Dear Paolo, Ela, Josh and Sunil,

Thank you for the opportunity to apply for the positions of SMP-VV and SMP-COM sub group convener. Please see my answers to your questions below. I answer the general questions first and then have a section (they became large sections) on each sub group

- sincerely – Matt Herndon

I would be willing to serve in either the positions of SMP-VV or SMP-COM convener. I would prefer SMP-VV but think SMP-COM would be very interesting and valuable as well.

I expect that I would be able to devote about 40% of my time to one of these positions. My other responsibilities include CSC muon refurbishment work, CSC muon detailed performance monitoring, SMP Rivet contact, various CMS duties such as ARCs and CSC muon conference board representative, mentoring my graduate students, and teaching.

To give some detail on the CSC projects, I manage physical construction projects like maintaining the fixture used to dismount chambers, low voltage distribution boxes, and physical objects such as aluminum CSC covers and thermal conductors. For the detailed CSC monitoring we are upgrading the monitoring software for hit and segment efficiencies in preparation for the next run and building in the ability to correlate with things like gas gain and measured currents. I gave some detail on the CSC work because that work represents commitments that cannot be reduced.

In summary, my commitments as a percentage of my real time would be.

10% CSC physical infrastructure (note this is now reduced because we have produced many of the deliverables)

10% CSC performance monitoring (mentoring students) (reduced during the shutdown compared to when we are running)

10% Rivet SMP contact

5% ARCs and muon conference board

10% analysis (mentoring students)

15% teaching and other faculty duties

On SMP-VV:

I have been an analyzer and worked with my own and other UW students within the SMP-VV group since I joined CMS full time in 2011. Before that I had worked on CMS part time, simultaneous with the CDF experiment, supervising one CMS student who was also working in the SMP-VV group. I, my students, and my postdocs have participated in analysis in the following channels: WZ, cross sections, differential cross sections, anomalous couplings, and VBS; ZZ, cross sections, differential cross sections, anomalous couplings, and VBS; and Zg (nunugamma), cross sections, differential cross sections, anomalous couplings. I’ve also worked on future physics studies for the HL-LHC in the WZ VBS mode. I have substantial experience in multi-boson physics having worked on it at CDF (WW and WZ) and at CMS as stated above. I have close constants within the theory community with experts on cross section calculation and anomalous couplings. I am a founding member of the MBI, multi boson interactions, conference. I previously led the SMP-VV group and would be happy to lead it again since its physics program comprises my favorite area of physics within the CMS collaboration.

Currently I see the future of the SMP-VV group organized around producing a full set of Run 2 results and then later leveraging that analysis infrastructure and knowledge to produce a superior set of early papers using Run 3 data (as compared to previous early efforts during new runs.) Some of the physics goals for these papers should include.

1) Fiducial cross section measurements.

We have currently started to produce analysis at the 4% level of precision. An analysis of the systematic uncertainties of these analyses indicates that 3% should be easily in reach and, with a careful study of the sources of uncertainty and the design of a program to address them, 2% uncertainty may be achievable. We should be planning for true high precision cross section measurement in ZZ, WZ, and Zg and high quality measurement in WW, ssWW and Wg and gg

2) Differential measurements: general

In differential measurements, we should be seeking to measure a full set of properties with a focus on distributions that have sensitivity to NNLO QCD or NLO EWK effects. Clearly the high-energy tails of distributions are interesting but also variables including angles between vector boson decay products or between the vector bosons and jets. To that end, we should be mastering the latest (N)NLO technologies.

3) Differential cross sections: jets

There is now a large array of cross section calculation and MCs to compare to. Fixed order calculations can assess states with a vector bosons and up to several jets, NLO or NNLO calculations can add 1 or 2 jets in the final stage and the interference with loop diagrams. MCs with parton shower and matching can add additional jets and the equivalent of logarithmic resummation. For a given number of jets it is not always clear what the best prediction might be and we need to compare to all relevant predictions.

4) VBS and triboson physics

We should continue the program of trying to discover all the VBS and triboson states. However, here we have to be careful of our strategy. Many distribution with sensitivity to these states are not well modeled and some analysis have used such distributions in multivariate discriminants in an overly aggressive way. We should support our discoveries and further analyze observed modes with careful studies of the kinematics, especially the jet kinematics, of VBS modes

5) Other physics of interest

We should expand analysis to measure properties of high physics interest such as polarization and high energy tails (for the high energy tails using higher branching ratio decays of vector bosons to neutrinos or quarks).

6) anomalous coupling

We should refocus anomalous coupling measurement in modern paradigms such as EFT. Within the context of EFT we should look to implement coming improvements such as NLO QCD treatments or EWK corrections. We should try to more regularly extend our new physics treatments to include models or simplified models (even if this is outside the context of the SMP-VV group).

7) Collaboration with theorists.

To accomplish some of the above we need strong connections with the theory community which I have always encouraged and participated in. These include efforts to compare multiple MCs to data in forums like dedicated workshops and also frameworks like Rivet. It also includes mastering and using regularly publically available tools for NNLO calculation.

8) Collaboration with ATLAS

We should expand our collaboration with ATLAS with a focus on producing more equivalent comparisons between our data and predictions.

On SMP-COM

Many of my physics interests in multiboson physics and SMP physics in general overlap the mission of SMP-COM. I have not yet worked on analysis directly in the context of SMP-COM. However, due to my interests and projects I have followed the work of the SMP-COM group expecting that I would perform work there eventually.

My primary project that would certainly result in work in SMP-COM would be anomalous couplings and their eventual combination.

However, I am also keenly interested in flagship projects such as W mass and sin2 theta W. That interest derives from my expertise and (peripheral) engagement in those projects as an author of substantial parts of the CDF tracking reconstruction software and as the CDF tracking group convener.

I view SMP-COM more as a set of projects to be executed and a further mission to propagate the positive effects of these projects to all SMP analysis. Some projects that I would engage the SMP-COM group in are:

1) Combination of anomalous couplings within CMS and with ATLAS

This project involves several facets. Developing a common infrastructure (within CMS) and likely a comparison of infrastructures between CMS and ATLAS. Development of standards practices for the analysis in terms of selection, treatment of systematic uncertainties, and optimization. Comparison of calculations and MC generators for anomalous couplings to ensure equivalency and correctness. I have substantial experience in such projects having supervised the one CMS-ATLAS aTGC combination that was performed and also having worked on and supervised the CDF-DO Higgs combination while leading the CDF Higgs group and working on the H->WW channel.

2) Combination of precision measurements. These could include W mass and sin2 theta W but also possibly W and Z cross sections, and perhaps important differential distributions where we want the highest precision like Zpt and/or phi*. This does not try to be an exhaustive list! As ground work or even for its own sake these combinations would include comparisons and development of standard practices between the CMS and ATLAS analysis. Even if that work did not always lead to combinations I think the SMP-COM group would be an appropriate driver of that agenda.

3) PDFs

PDFs are a project that clearly in the end demands a combination of available data. Though we should continue to engage the global PDFs group in order to assist them to maximally leverage our data I think we should develop our own High Energy PDF along the lines of the DIS regime HERA PDF sets.

4)
The results of all these efforts can be propagated back to the other SMP groups in the form of improved limit setting frameworks, PDF fitting frameworks, standard practices that make analysis easier to perform and validate, and recipes for easier use of tools like cross section calculations or higher order MCs.

2019 07 31

CSC meeting

DQM talk

Status of neutron background and radiation simulations
Explained operation of:
neutron background with updated MC simulation data/MC comparisons with CSCValidation
neutron background studies with dedicated neutron background isolation code
Fluka simulations for fluences

CSC segment efficiences

He CSC refurbishment
Suggested He should spend 1/3 analysis and 2/3 CSC refurbishment and should be encouraged to start P5 work

2019 08 01

CSC radiation issues
Sent email to expert for clarification on programs used

CSC segment efficiencies
Formulated a plan
Isa finishes problem rings for 2018D
Stephen processes to get projections and chamber efficiencies
Stephen processes 2019B and 2019C data
Try simpler ideas for circumventing processing problems
Transfer task to a better student

Phones
Tracking down cell phones

differential Rivet plots
Keegan will produce differential plots for mVV, m_jj, delta_eta_jj
Emailed Usama and James for scripts - James sent one

2019 08 02

Comments on fake lepton backgrounds in B physics to Camilla and Wren
We should use Ks, phi, and D* techniques like in Bs->mumu
Wren is looking in to this

Muon conference status

Summary
1) We probably should have reviewed the DPF talk on Gas Mixture longevity studies. I looked it over and it was fine. Probably Darien reviewed it which is more than adequate.
2) We have a poster at TWEEP we should advertise. If no one volunteers then as per our previous conversation with higher up people in the conference committee we would just withdraw the poster.
3) We should make sure practice talks are organized and review the 3 talks for NEC.
4) There are a bunch of pending talks at IPRD2019. If they are accepted we should deal with them.

Upcoming talks

10-Jul-19 Upgrade of the CSC Muon System for .. EPS-HEP2019 Vivan Thi Nguyen
Done

DPF2019: 2019 Meeting of the Division of Particles & Fields of the American Physical Society, 29 Jul-2 Aug 2019, Boston, MA (United States)

Gas Mixture Longevity Studies for the CMS Cathode Strip Chambers in Preparation of HL-LHC
Talk, 1 accepted nominee Andrew Lloyd Wisecarver, Northestern
We should have noticed and reviewed this.
Done

TWEPP2019: Topical Workshop on Electronics for Particle Physics, 2-6 Sep 2019, Universidad de Santiago de Compostel, Santiago de Compostela (Spain)

Status of the Electronics Upgrade of the Cathode Strip Chamber (CSC) Muon Detectors of the CMS experiment for the HL-LHC
Poster, no nomiminee

NEC2019: The 27th International Symposium Nuclear Electronics and Computing (NEC’2019), 30 Sep-4 Oct 2019, (JINR, CERN, Becici (Montenegro)

Data Quality Monitoring for the CMS Cathode Strip Chambers: implementation, performance and operational experience.
Talk, 1 accepted nominee Victor Barashko, Univ. of Florida

Electronics upgrade for the CMS CSC muon system at the High Luminosity LHC
Talk, 1 accepted nominee, Isabelle Helena J De Bruyn (Univ. of Wisconsin)

Hit Reconstruction Improvement in the Cathode Strip Chambers of the CMS Experimen
Talk, 1 accepted nominee, Nikolay Voytishin (JINR)

IPRD2019: 15th Topical Seminar on Innovative Particle and Radiation Detectors, 14-17 Oct 2019, Siena (Italy)

Upgrade to the CMS Cathode-Strip-Muon System for the HL-LHC
Talk, no nmoninee, Pending acceptance by the conference

The CMS Muon System: performance during the LHC Run-2
Talk, 1 nomination, Ilaria Vai, Pending acceptance by the conference

Background in the CMS muon detectors: simulation and measure with pp collision data
Talk, 2 Nominations, Pending acceptance by the conference
Daniele Fasanella (CERN)
Sergio Lo Meo (Univ. di Bologna e Sez. dell'INFN)

Updated aC and xs summary plots

2019 08 05

UW CMS meeting

SMEFT acceptance

Review LP multiboson talk
Pointed out updated summary plots

VH HH MBI talks
Speaker finalized

BPH-16-004 IR for CWR
Reviewed and transmitted UW IR comments

2019 08 06

MBI talks content
Assignment of experiments content to talks
Need to contact CMS speakers

HIN-19-003 review
Study of HIN techniques used in this paper https://arxiv.org/abs/1209.2323
Reviewed AN

2019 08 07

HIN-19-003 review
Reviewed paper
Combined comments and transmitted

2019 08 08

MBI 2020 planning

EW Zg CWR comments
Authors say they have responded to all comments
Reviewed Author responses to first set of comments
Sent my notes and a request to address all comments to authors

2019 08 09

MBI talks
Emailed speakers about joint ATLAS CMS content

Muon talks
Updated muon conference information
Advertised TWEPP and IPRD poster and talk
Need to organize NEC practice talks
Checked future conferences, found IEEE needs very early submission

Muon CSC conference committee
Setup regular meeting

CSC electronics meeting
Aluminum covers have not arrived yet

2019 08 12

UW CMS meeting

CSC Eff comparison
2018 D plots
Reviewed plots and found comparison examples

Buchanan Thesis Introduction,
Reviewed

2019 08 14

CSC meeting
CSC conference talks
Advertised upcoming talks

2019 08 15

CSC large covers
Arrived at CERN

2019 08 16

Zhu letter
Transmitted

Buchanan thesis defense
Successfully defended

2019 08 19

UW CMS meeting

IPRD CSC talk candidate
Found candidate

CSC Eff comparison
Armando noted pT dependence
Different slope in Seg vs LCT

2019 08 20

IPRD CSC talk nomination
Endorsed nomination

CSC efficiency plots to group
Comparison to 2019A: https://agenda.hep.wisc.edu/event/1268/contribution/1/material/slides/0.pdf

2019 08 21

CSC meeting

CSC muon practice talks
Set up schedule for talk and discussed with conveners

Rivet WZ plots
Odd jet to jet bin ratios
Kenneth thinks is driven by inclusive nature of final bin

2019 08 22

TWEPP CSC poster cancelation

2019 08 23

Rivet questions on WZ+jets binned samples

2019 08 25

MBI talk reviews

2019 08 26

MBI 2019

2019 08 27

MBI 2019

Rivet work overview

2019 08 28

MBI 2019

2019 09 03

CSC efficiency talk review
Suggested comparison to previous bad chamber lists
Suggested including 2019A plots for comparison

2019 09 21

Muon news

MCPB report

MUO-17-001 Performance of the reconstruction and identification of
high-momentum muons in proton-proton collisions at sqrt(s) = 13 TeV
Finished CWR Aug 25th
Working on responses
(Tentative schedule: Working on full set of responses. ~1 week, post full set of responses: ~2 weeks)
(Originally they had target the beginning of the week just past for the full set of responses.   I just pushed up their original time table since they have not produced the responses yet)
(This is probably the most interesting thing going on)

MUO-19-001 CMS Muon Trigger for Run2
Going to pre approval
(Pre-approval talk on July 1st, not officially pre approved)
(Some additional work is in progress)
Paper draft exists
CSC Trigger experts could review this, the editors are taking comments.
(General review should probably wait)

We didn’t have many conference talks in the first part of this year so there have not been any proceedings to review yet .  
There was one talk at DPF where the proceedings were voluntary and a poster at EPS.  We have 4 upcoming talks.

Rivet for SMP-18-004
Answered question on MVA implementation in Rivet
It doesn't look like they really need this

Muon practice talks
Organizing a talk for Nikolay
Contacted Boris

2019 09 22

CMS week schedule
Meetings scheduled
Need to fit in Thursday Muon practice talks if possible
Need to schedule meetings with Stephen, He, Usama, Isa, Sascha

Muon practice talks
Organizing a talk for Nikolay
Tentatively Thursday

MBI 2020
Sent suggestions for advanced local organization
Reorganized mbox's

cross section summary plot update
top and X+jets plots updated
Updated references for 13 TeV ttZ and tttt
Updated results for 13 TeV ttbb
Updated git hub repository

aTGC summary plots update
Updated CMS 13 TeV WV central values
2 charged aTGC and EFT plots
References updated
Github repository updated

Revised DOE slideshow
Include modern CSC work including ME4/2 construction and LS2 electronics upgrade installation
Include Jeff and Kenneth's thesis'
Update cross section plot with better UW placement

2019 09 23

Ho-Fung research inquiry
Discuss with Sridhara and Kevin about group student needs
Meet next Monday to discuss research

Rivet SMP-17-001 DY
Commented on plots
Plots match those in paper
Why not 2 ee results as there are mumu results
Plots need labels

I looked over this result. Perhaps it is above in the thread but why is there only one electron result and two muon results?

Also the labeling in the plot does not make it clear what predictions are being compared to. i.e. FEWZ or aMC@NLO.

Question/comment separate from the Rivet review.

I’m a bit surprised at the solution to this problem. Proper treatment of correlated uncertainties are an essential part of
these fits and combinations and abandoning the blue combination, if not incorrect, reduces the precision of our measurements.
Since in essence doing a weighted mean is the same at having uncorrelated uncertainties it seems a minimal course of only
uncorrelating the problematic uncertainty could have been pursued. Perhaps this is what was done and I didn’t understand
that from the slides. To me also the treatment of the original uncertainty seems incorrect. Comparing to an alternative model
is supposed to estimate what the effect could be from such analysis choices. It should not be taken as the only possible
alternative. Treating it as a one sided uncertainly makes the assumption that you think that is the only reasonable alternative
and the possible effects can only be in one direction. If you more properly take it as an estimate of the magnitude of the effect
of such choices and treat it as a two sided uncertainty this issue might not have come up.

Anyway I don’t want to completely revisit these issues. The current treatment is correct if not an optimal use of the data.

CSC Efficiency meeting
2018D Finished
Action items
Produce failure table for segment selection cuts focused on ME1/1
Follow up with plots of problematic variables
Delta pT/pT matching may be problematic. Resolution progresses quadratically which means efficiency would drop linearly if cutting into distribution
2018B run
Run 2018C
Try to run next processing step for 2018B
Create new processing branch that counts passed and failed segments without fits or performs linear backgrond subtraction
Question to Stephen on background shape
If linear we can replace the whole structure with a one pass sideband subtraction method
Other restructuring for fast plotting?
Will restart CSC only Thursday 7:30 AM meeting

WZ meeting
nanoAOD is working well
May have some results on Thursday
Will start Thursday WZ meeting after CSC meeting

ZZ
Sascha is having He investigate deep learning based on jets
Chosen primarily as a learning project
Possibly useful for rejection pileup jets and central gluon jets
Most likely application is to VBS physics
Is there anyway to isolate VBS from EWK in order to optimize better?

UW CMS Meeting

VV Rivet question
Probably not necessary to evaluate lepton efficiencies or fake rates in a pT dependent way
Though if the data is there then that is probably a better starting point

Isa CSC slides for NEC
Reviewed slides for NEC
Largest concern is having a full understanding of all the material

2019 09 24

General muon meeting
Discussion of eco gas baseline
Baseline is original configuration meaning we have already substantially improved exceeding 30% goal
Should be prepared for zero emissions policy or inability to get gas
Critical muon issues is now intra readout element timing

CSC meeting
CSC talk issues
Should remember to work on talk database
Specific focus on motivation material and then useful plots and pictures

CSC IB meeting
Approved as resource manager
Need to follow up on timelines and issues from Darien Wood and Bob Claire
Contact overall RM, Anna
Research RM slides from previous meetings

Muon IB meeting

CSC efficiency
Sideband subtraction method
Current method used quadratic background model
Switch to sideband subtraction would be less general
However should execute order 100m events in under and hour on one processor

VBS ZZ optimization
Optimization on EWK including subdominant non VBS model may be non optimal
Sacha thinks effect will be small

CSC hit and segment reconstruction talk
To review

TOP-15-018 IR
Due Oct 3th (submit Oct 6th)

Decided on title for SMEFT talk
Need to resume consideration of content

2019 09 25

SMP meeting
EWK Wg analysis
No relavant issues
Call for Rivet routines

ARC EWK Zg review
Reviewed paper draft
Many problems introduced

ZZ meeting
cos theta polarization distribution as unfolded distribution in current ZZ paper
Concentrate on deep learning for superior EWK ZZ analysis
Monitor MC progress on tagging polarization
Weekly meeting after Thursday CSC meeting
Investigate separating ZZ VBS so be able to isolate that signal for optimization
Would improve fiducial cross section measurements

2019 09 26

ARC VBS Zg review
Finished review of paper draft
Typographical errors, awkward or incorrect sentences and phrases, other issues
Asked for LE to check paper again after paper is updated
Will need to read through paper again

CSC meeting
Stephen on CSC Efficiencies
Period 2018 B finished running
Started post processing period 2018 B
Started processing period 2018 B
Expects for cut failure lists to be done this weekend
Considering how to implement sideband subtraction method
First as function in current framework, then evaluate performance gain
Then rewrite framework from ground up

WZ meeting
Still fixing compile time problems
Expect first results, perhaps just signal, tomorrow

EFT talk discussion
With Septa, VVV, author
Issues to consider covering in EFT talk
Unitarity of aTGC and aQGC
Best method for unitarity
EFT for neutral modes. CP conserving and violating, non renormalizable, ...
Anomolous quartic couplings to assess SM QGC
Simplified models and models
Complete sets of operators
aTGC aQGC VV vs EWK VV sensitivity
Fitting multiple parameters
Combining with Higgs (and Top?)

Muon reconstruction talk
What plots need to be approved
Develop statement on approval of plots
General issue with central practice talks

US CMS meeting

Contacted Anna, muon system RM, about CSC RM job

2019 09 27

Reviewed Bs mumu comments
Authors disregarded most of our comments
Treatment was widespread enough to be clearly systematic and in need of response
Notify UW group of responses

RM resource manager materials
Reviewed CSC RM, muon RM and US CMS RM L2 slides
Developed list of materials and rough time table of activities
Overall RM Anna is working on adding me to the proper lists

2019 09 29

SMEFT talk outline

2019 09 30

GMM plot approval
Approval of plots for hit and segment reconstruction talk

UW CMS meeting

SMEFT talk research

2019 10 01

SMEFT talk
Wrote complete talk

2019 10 02

CSC HFO tests at PNPI
2% HFO gives equivalent gas gains
No damage up to a few times HLLHC exposure
After than there were issues
No Malter effect observed
Need GIF++ test

Rivet MVA discussion
Unless MVA is used in defining phase space not need in selection

SMEFT talk
Update with Warsaw basis operators

Review Ian's talk and papers on WW, WZ production at NLO with polarization and sermonic operators
Look for POWHEG implementation program
Discuss with Sascha after review

2019 10 03

SMEFT workshop
Discussion with Frank on feasibility of Z to 4tau
Sent questions to Sridhara
Interesting talks on D8 vs D6 operator contributions due to polarization

Keegan Rivet study
W+jets contribution looks okay
Divide 0.5 to 1.0 TeV bin to see behavior of background

2019 10 04

SMEFT workshop

SMPCom EFT talk
Wrote first draft

Tomsk travel situation
Need to review

2019 10 07

UW CMS meeting

Rivet study of W+jets for WW
Events grater than 500GeV concentrated at masses near 500
Actually turns out to be one event at ~580 GeV

CSC RM funding issues
Tomsk state lost funding for group salaries and travel
Reported to muon RM

2019 10 08

SMPCom EFT talk
Answered emailed questions afterward

EWK WW backgrounds
Probably need to run 10M events
Keegan working on using condor

2019 10 09

CSC managers meeting
Higher current in stage 2 CSCs
Cause unknown

CSC meeting

ARC EWK Zg status
Still waiting for new draft after post CWR comments from Ankita and I

ARC HIN Z status
New draft to review
Comments addressed adequately

HL-LHC muon backgrounds conference proceeding
Comments on why/what is being simulated and tested for HL-LHC like backgrounds

CSC RM Update
Studied RM meal and documents
Asked to update 2018, 2019, 2020 expenditures on the upgrade.
Also noticed VTX loan
Emailed Darien for information

2019 10 10

UW CSC meeting
Failed segment and LCT results
Actually showed failed probes
Could just adjust matching criteria from 5cm and 5sigma to 8cm and 8sigma to test effect
Failed probes indicate data for non-isolated muons is being stored
This could make the temporary data 10 times larger than needed
Need to clean up result to understand if this is true. Instructions sent to Stephen
Need to review He's minutes

UW VV meeting
WZ: Stephen
new ntuple plotting results
Plots seem inconsistent in terms of data vs MC overall discrepancy
Njet plots are on the way
Sent WZ aC papers to Stephen
ZZ Deep learning: He
Looked over deepJet pages and talks
Want to find out if boosted top vs background comprise the example files

CSC RM upgrade expenditures
Reviewed spreadsheets
Sent request for more detailed US 2019 spending to Darien Wood
Sent request for Russian spending to Andrew Korytov. Also sent request for name of PNPI contact

2019 10 11

ARC HIN Z update
Presentation from authors
Main change is update to electron scale factors
My judgement is that analysis is ready for preliminary status

CSC RM upgrade expenditures
Received updated information from Darien Wood on US expenditures
All in kind contribution finished except OMDB
OMDB funding partially spent
Updated Muon RM spreadsheet to indicate current US contribution status
No contact from Russians
Procedures from Bob Clair on US expenditures
Translate budget spread sheets to indicate core costs (removing manpower)
Since all contributions are in kind update money as spent at exactly the same amount except where there are major changes
Make updates when there are major changes
Russian contributions will be more complex
Major update tasks areK
Update with NSF MRECF funding adjusted to indicate core costs
Update Russian 2019 spending
Understand and update status of Russian 60kCHF loan

2019 10 14

UW CMS meeting
ZZ Deepcore software running
Progress on WZ jets and CSC efficiencies error checks

RM update status
Received information on Russian RMDS power distribution project funding
2018 money all spent
Contribution in 2018 divided as initially intended between HV components
2019 and 2020 contributions officially adjusted
No money yet distributed in 2019
Updated spreadsheet and Anna included in talk
60k load to Tomsk by CMS TC not repaid
M&O needs to be updated with upgrade contributions

Rivet VV study
W+jets study for SS and OS WW looks good

Muon talk and conference proceedings
Reviewed background talk, good
Proceeding comment implemented by author

2019 10 15

RM upgrade update
Russian 2017 contributions corrected
Asked Darien Wood, USCMS EMU manager, about level of adjustment that should be reported. Probably none
Informed Bob Clare, CMS CMS PM, about Russian funding status
Need to update M&O upgrade contributions

SMP VV meeting
WZ study measures polarization with good uncertainty
Only implements standard aTGC parameterizations
EWK ZZ study MELA sensitivity is reported not to be good

Rivet VV study
Sent Keegan instructions on ttbar backgrounds

ZZ deep core studies
Suggested to He that once the code runs he should more to ZZ EWK signal and ZZ QCD background samples

2019 10 16

Extended technician contract
Extended contract of Guiju Fan
Need to find the names of all the technicians we have on staff and what arrangements exist regarding them

2019 10 17

UW CSC meeting
Reviewed code for CSC efficiencies
Segments and LCTs are chosen purely based on being closest to the track intersection for the 3rd layer of a station
Locate coordinates, distances and uncertainties are stored
Will try doubling absolutes and sigma criteria for matching. Scaling of efficiency with pT makes me suspect this is the problem
Look for phi problem that could indicate alignment
See if histograms of these quantities are available
He status is that he is preparing for a preliminary examination and hardware work is enough
Find out Within's status
Information for Armando on Russian HV project
Replacement of CAEN system was the critical item
Voltage distribution boards can wait for later if done by the end of LS3
Asked Armando to get list of technicians. Should follow up in email

UW VV meeting
Waiting for NJet plots from Stephen
He investigating jet variables to make sure they look good and are ready for input in deep learning training

2019 10 18

FastCSCEff program and ME11a results
Implemented FastCSCEff.
Runs directly over Tag and Probe ntuples
Process 1M events every 30 second. 8 minutes to run over 2018D data
Reproduced Stephens ME11a efficiency drop with pT
Failed ME11a probes appear to be driven by low eta, consistent with ME11b, tracks

2019 10 21

UW CMS meeting

2019 10 22

SMP general meeting
Wg analysis is progressing. Monitor

FastCSCEff results
Investigated local coordinates of failed probes
Communicated with Tim
Probe instruction at positive local y while segment at negative local y
ME11a and ME11b share a local coordinate system
positive local y ME11b while segment at negative local y ME11a with some overlap
Looked at Tag and Probe code
Only saves one probe for station 1.
May be either
- Saving ME11a segment when failed to find ME11b segment. In efficiency would be ME11b
- Overwriting ME11b segment. Would be no inefficiency

Rivet VV ttbar backgrounds
First results sent. Asked about jet and b-tag issues..

2019 10 23

Emailed Kenneth on aC and EFT

CSC managers meeting

CSC meeting

2019 10 24

UW CSC meeting
Discussed the fiducial regions to identify golden areas for efficiency measurement
This resolves any issue on how to treat overlaps
In general radial local "y" overlaps probably not treated correctly
radial fiducially likely not applied
need to check if other phi "x" overlaps are treated correctly
Should develop second either acceptance or non acceptance corrected efficiency including overlap treatment
Repair of one chamber can take a minimum of 2 days but typically 5 days

UW VV meeting
WZ plots look better but may improve more as bug fixes are applied to all samples
Should consider expected differences due to using DY and Zg instead of data driven fake rates
ZZ progress toward more realistic example
We could apply a deep learning based discriminate to WZ to improve analysis if marginal

Rivet VV ttbar backgrounds
b jets are MC information identified
anto b-tag factors applied but probably no correctly to 1 and 2 b jet situations

2019 10 25

Rivet VV study
Outlined content for note to work on
Listing of signal and backgrounds
Selection emphasizing common and disjoint elements
Table of cross section
Table of events at 1ab-1
Differential cross section plot m_jj, eta_jj, m_VV or mT_VV
Table of significances using signal/sqrt(bkg)
Plot of significance vs integrated luminosity
Consideration of significance method. Switch to 1D or 2D fit using combine?

EFT meetings
There are issues with using Madspin at NLO
Interesting that there are no issues at LO?
Work ongoing on VV VH EFT overlap
EWK VV scattering has sensitivity to Higgs operators

2019 10 28

UW meeting

2019 10 29

SMP VV meeting
5 TeV WZ analysis done

2019 10 30

CSC managers meeting

CSC meeting

EWK Vg JEU discussion
EWK Wg and Zg analysis used signal systematic uncertainties on Jet energy for for the background
Largest effect is in high eta region
Effect should be secondary because
Uncertainties should be representative
No pathological different between the pt and eta to m_ff and delta_eta_jj mapping is expected
EWK Zg analysis uses a control region

2019 10 31

UW CSC and VV meetings cancled
Need to finish me11 debugging

Comments on EPS CSC poster

2019 11 01

CSC me11a efficiency vs pT issue
Emailed Tim to discuss problem
Need failed events
Emailed failed events with run section information to Stephen
Emailed line by line analysis of failure to Tim.
Started to understand problem partially

EWK Zg JEU discussion
Emailed Meng to give instruction on what to address in presentation

2019 11 04

UW CMS meeting
Discussion of Zg aTGC result.
Flat behavior with gamma pT looks incorrect and does not match ATLAS results

Rivet VV analysis
Review of samples and analysis cuts

CSC me11a efficiency vs pT issue
Received failed events
Could no run due to VOMS and release issues
Updated VOMS access
Further discussion with Tim

2019 11 05

CSC me11a efficiency vs pT issue
Updated release and was able to run events
However can only process one event
Stephen has the same problem which is not understood
Might be due to skipping over lumi sections
Identified issue as matchTTwithLCTs overwritting ring variable information by passing in variable by reference

EWK Zg JEU issue
Had meeting
Only causes small change in results
Want to pursue understanding of statistical vs systematic contributions to the new result
Kenneth indicates there might be more issues

2019 11 06

CSC me11a efficiency vs pT issue
Discussed with Tim and understood that issue goes both ways
However, less likely to be a significant effect on me11b (lower eta)
Designed correct. Simply comments out two lines that overwrite the ring variable information
Outlined plan to Stephen

2019 11 07

UW CSC meeting
CSC me11a efficiency vs pT issue
Ntuples are running. Three jobs. Short, 2018d post HV change, all 2018D
Discussion of issue and two way and redistributing inefficiencies.
Average me11a+me11b efficiency should be the same
Likely lowers me11a efficiency and introduces pT depedence
May raise me11b efficiency compared to correct result

UW VV meeting
Issues adapting Kenneth's nano AOD code code to 2016 and 2019
Suggested using 2017 data for prelim

2019 11 11

UW CMS meeting

Issue with Zg aTGC samples
Samples are Sherpa
NLO correction are significant.
Results show large effect as low gamma Et and decllning effect with Et
Results look worse after NLO correction applied
Sherpa and madgraph agreement not good on SM samples

CSC efficiency jobs crashed with segmentation fault
Problem corrected now

2019 11 12

SMP VV meeting
Zg progress presented

APS conference
Send out call for abstract submissions

review NEC conference proceeding
Presentation on hit and segment reconstruction improvements
Precentor: Nikolay Voytishin
Sent comments

2019 11 13

CSC managers meeting

CSC meeting
less of readout efficiency of DCFEB compared with TMB data block comparator data
Approximately 15%
First seen in ME+3/1
Now seen in ME+2/1
Latency setting make a difference.
Did the 80% plot mean the problem was substantially better since the TMB comparator data efficiency was about 80%
That seems low considering overall efficiencies are in the high 90% range
Problem also seen in single chamber runs were near 100% efficiency is expected

NEC conference proceeding
Reviewed Isa DeBryun's proceeding
Sent comments

2019 11 14

UW CSC meeting
Update on DCFEB issue
Issue with both ALCT, comparator, DCFEB
80% efficiency is a general problem
No solution at the moment
CSC manpower
Need another student through the spring and summer for CSC extraction team
Good report on He's work
Will inquire with UW CMS PIs
CSC efficiency ntuples
Issues with crashing. Jobs running again

UW VV meeting
No news

2019 11 15

UW HEP grad student presentation
Wrote presentation
Gave presentation
Good detailed questions
Need to meet with my advisee

Sent email on CSC manpower

2019 11 17

Recommendation for Parker
Also sent general advice on how to deal with the no complete analysis issue

2019 11 18

UW CMS meeting
Still issues in Zg aC
Good progress from He
Ntuples for CSC efficiency running

CSC efficiency ntples with ME11 fix
test run ntuples ready
Wrote and tested code for chaining ntuples
result indicate ME11 a to b inefficiency misassignment bug fixed
Need more statistics to prove pT dependence

CSC manpower
Wren volunteered

2019 11 19

SMP meeting
Recommendations on Jet physics useful

SMP Com meeting

CSC efficiency ntples with ME11 fix
Part of post HV run ready
Can see some change in pT dependence but statistics are low - 1.5 million events
Efficiency higher and pT dependence in ME11a reduced but still present

2019 11 20

CSC managers and general meeting
Need to confirm the ALCT, comparator, DCFEB issue is resolved

CSC efficiency local Y dependence
Plotted efficiency vs. local x dependence
Fiducial range -70 to -30
See falling efficiency in from ~-35 to -30
Effect is significant but more statistics would be useful

2019 11 21

CSC efficiency vs local Y discussion
Armando recommends:
Efficiency in p or pT bins
Efficiency vs local X
Bringing Tim into the loop
All probably need more statistics
Status of ntples is that full 2018D probably has about 3 times the statistics
Requested that it be copied over
Also a 25% job failure rate. Asked Stephen for some information

CSC RM meeting
Generated task list for M&O, Upgrade and people database tasks
Starting with cooling loan issue, email sent to Armando
Need to add prioritization dates

2019 11 22

Cooling loan issue understood

cost is not expected to change even though the fabrication is ongoing.  I have a 
more detailed breakdown of the components of the cost if necessary.

Dubna has already made an in-kind contribution of manpower to the fabrication 
that resulted in 25% reduction in the cost.   So the original cost was 166951.39 CHF 
and Dubna has contributed 41,747.84 CHF in kind.

TC and CSC have an agreement that CSC will repay a fraction of the cost.   However, 
the fraction and time scale have not been determined yet.    The time scale for repayment 
is expected to be about 2 years.   The repayment cost is to be split between the 
US-CMS and Dubna.  However, the fractions have also not been determined and 
it’s considered likely that Dubna has already contributed what they can so the repayment 
obligation is likely to eventually fall on the US-CMS.

I’d like some guidance on how to enter this information. 

I think we can enter Dubna’s in kind contribution.  Should this be entered as an addition 
cost compared to the original commitment?  Perhaps I should create a new cooling circuit 
item to keep it separate from other costs.

For the loan I would suggest we can enter it on the loan sheet without carrying it over to the 
other sheets with a note indicating the % is still being negotiated with TC.  Then we can 
update that when it is finalized.

Update RM spreadsheet after input from Anna.

EWK Zg ARC review
CCLE additional review done, need to review draft

2019 11 25

UW CMS meeting
He should compare ZZ discrimination results to ZZ BDT analysis

CSC efficiency memory lead discussion
Stephens description of job failure results indicates that there is a likely memory lead

CSC student help
Armando and Isa informed that Wren is avialalbe for CSC LS2 work

SMP VV meeting EFT discussion
Discussed which operators VBS may have sensitivity compared to inclusive VV and Higgs

2019 11 26

CSC efficiency fiducial efficiencies
Showed that there is a l2% lose of efficiency on the ME11a ME11b boundary

CSC, efficiency post HV bug fix results
Showed that the bug fix recovers lost efficiency with pt in ME11a
However, there is a hint of residual inefficiency
ME11b results look good and flat with pT

CSC efficiency full dataset problems
Full dataset seems to still have the bug

Downham statement comments
Sent comments

2019 11 27

CSC meeting

CSC efficiency fiducial discussion
Long discussion from Tim on me11a me11b boundary and fiducial
Readout division on the boundary. Should only be in wires not strips
Coded as separate volumes which carries to alignment even though the chamber parts are not physically separate
Treating the two area separately allows the possibility of an unphysical misalignment which can effect efficiency.
Technically hard to address
Should investigate and quantify more carefully
Released fiducial and found large effect including loss of efficiency over complete chamber, higher toward edges
Need to understand fiducial calculation and uncertainties

RM Tomsk VTTX loan inquiry
Sent inquiry to Tomsk
Anna in cc

2019 11 28

CSC RM Tomsk loan reply
Received reply that did not answer the questions

HIN IR
Reviewed HIN-180005 Upsilon production paper
Rewrote question on A scaling from Kevin and I

2019 11 29

Downham recommendation
Complete first draft of recommendation
Reviewed and updated first draft

CSC efficiency ntuples

CSC RM Tomsk loan reply
Received reply that there was no loan
Anna said she will pull up the documentation on Monday when she is at CERN

HIN IR
Review of HIN-18-005 Upsilon production
Submitted comments

RM manpower database update
Updated database based on CMS database and EPR entries
Emailed all group leaders for information
Updated some entries with responses
Updated Anna on status

2019 11 30

Downham recommendation
Completed final draft
Checked which recommendations to submit on Dec 1st

RM manpower database update
Updated some entires with responses

2019 12 01

Downham recommendation
Transmitted Dec 1 recommendations

2019 12 02

UW CMS meeting

CSC Efficiencies
Study of fiducial requirements
Studied y position, y uncertainty, sigma
Issue with segment being required still exists.
Problematic for me11a inner edge, not me11a m11b boundary
Issue that smaller of x and y distance from edge is choosen
Uncertainty distribution. Exponentially falling distribution to 1cm. Second distribution of large uncertainty at greater than 1cm
May be from anomalous tracker tracks. Should problem remove.
Efficiency fall with uncertainty and is bad but raising beyond 1cm
Efficiency falls toward edge. Rises after edge but may be an effect of a segment begin required. 1-2 cm fiducial would be enough
Efficiency falls with sigma
Should change sigma cut from 3 to 5 and use 1-2cm fiducial
Demonstrated that efficiency goes up with these requirements. Most by removing the anomalous uncertainty distribution component
Each ring would have to be checked

2019 12 03

CSC Efficiencies
Fiducial requirements discussion

Tomsk VTTx loan
They received 50k funding and made purchases
See later

2019 12 04

CSC General meeting and managers meeting

CSC Efficiencies
Fiducial requirements discussion
Demonstrated that efficiency goes up with my requirements

EW Zg comparison with ATLAS
ATLAS result less sensitive, no comparison done.

Reviewed code for memory leaks
Did not find any obvous ones but there are areas of poor memory management style using pointers
May be per run memory leaks but they look small
Requested study of CSC efficiency job memory management

2019 12 05

UW CSC meeting
Discussed CSC efficiency job memory management

2019 12 06

EW Zg comments sent

EW Zg proceed to FR
Email to confirm ready to proceed

2019 12 07

CSC Eff y fiducial discussion
Discussed that mixing of x and y by taking shortest distance from edge
was accounted for by checking samples selected in center region of y and x
including accounting for the trapezoidal shape

2019 12 09

US CMS meeting
Issue ZZ analysis and EFT
Keeping my hands off and allowing Usama and Sascha to argue the issue
I would have advocated using EFT

RM meeting preperation
Updates to M&O budget, Upgrade budget, manpower and laons

* 2019 12 08 UW CMS meeting, RM budgets, RM manpower updates, RM VTTx loan

M&OB contributions
United States anticipates meetings it obligations
- technically some manpower costs will still be paid this month
- as of the end of the years all accounts will be audited
- since all contributions are in kind and obligation have or will be
met I marked all as met since we would not adjust the numbers
after the fact for small changes in the cost of in kind contributions

Russia has not received M&OB funding
- Effects 62K of upgrade and maintenance for LV and HV systems
- Work is not critical and has been delayed
- According to orignial division 3K goes in some other categories
to be understood.
* Action item: Identify where 3K belongs
- Russian responses to queries are somewhat confusing. May be some
misunderstanding on overall status of M&OB funding
* Action item: Confirm that statement from Russian representatives
on delay in funding applies to both Upgrade funding and portion
of upgrade that is funded through M&O
** Action item: When will RMDS money come, will it be outstanding. Communication with RDMS.
Add comment that we are contacting them to discuss,
10CHF inkind, 6CHF done and 4 to come. So need to discuss whether any has been contributed.
Is part of this GEM or other project?

Upgrade contribution
United States
- All money received
- ~3/4 of all OTMB to be done in 2020 though all money has been received.
- Action item - update 2019 with final percentage of OTMB delivered and note work will be finished in 2020

Russia
- No Upgrade money for high and low voltage system have been received for 2019
- Work is not critical, has been delayed, and the expectation is the money
will eventually arrive
? Question: Do we want to adjust the alignment of years for these
contributions, i.e moving them into 2020 or beyond to meet the new
expectations of when the money will arrive? - No
? Questions: What is Tomsks M&OB contribution and when did it start.
* Action item: Clarify Tomsk's M&OB status. 2021 budget in preperation should include then
* Action item: When will RMDS money come, will it be outstanding. Inquire with Russian group leaders

Loan status
- Status of "loan" for VTTx. Tomsk states that they received the VTTx
funding and transfered the money and the purchases were made.
Armando, Bob and Darien are still discussing some sort of loan.
I have asked for clarification
- VTTx and adaptors was split into 50k and 60k purchases.
Tomsk recieved funding for 50k purchase
CERN made loan for 60k purchase
* Action items
Get documenation for laon
Update load table
Make sure Tomsk upderstands status of this loan
Establish when the loan might be repaid

Cooling loan status
- TC made a loan of 125213.54 for cooling circuit fabrication, which likely
the US will cover, However, it is still under negotiation
who will pay for this between the US and Russian and nothing is
marked in the table yet.
- Dubna made an in kind contribution of 41,747.84 in labor to the cooling circuit
fabrication. This has been marked as an advanced contribution for 2020 in 2019
Should the 2020 tables be updated to indicate this contribution. Should other
any other contributions be reduced?
? Questions: When we are ready to enter the information how should it be done.
* Action Items
Check cooling Item costs for 2020, 2021, 2022
Update load table with note on cost sharing
Update 2021 table with Dubna contribution and then anticipate the 2021 cost contribution in 2020
Similarly anticipate the rest of the loan costs
Clarity cost charing between US and CMS

Manpower
- Most US institutions have responded. Many of them just to me since I had already
emailed asking for clarification on any issues I identified..
TAMU, UCLA, Wisconsin, Riverside, UCSB, Northeastern, Florida, Rice completely
up to date
Need responses from Boston, Davis
- No response from Russian institutions except Tomsk. Note all the Russian
personnell are listed in the CMS database and generally known to be contributing
so there may be no change except for students.
- Chinese institution has responded and entry is up to date
* Action item: Finalize manpower table with Russian and final US responses.

China
Should we be updating to including China in these tables.
Question: Is China making an upgrade contribution
Question: What is China's M&OB contribution and when did it start.
* Action item: Clarify China's Upgrade and M&OB status
* Action item: We are preparing the M&O budget for 2022 Should include China
Tomsk too

2019 12 10

RM meeting

CSC eff memory check jobs suggestions
Jobs not yet successful

2019 12 11

RM budget discussion with Darien and Bob and responses from the 12th

The RMO group is moving ahead with making changes to many of the budget tables. To update the CSC tables there are a number of issues that have to be clarified. Could you think about the following questions and send any answers you have.

1) Cooling loan This is to be placed in the M&OB budget. FYI: The current thinking is to list this in the 2021 and 2022 M&OB budgets and then anticipate the cost in 2020. 50k in two years had already been placed in 2020 and 2021, but for 2020 this is not allowed since the 2020 budget was approved last year and is not supposed to be changed. Bob: could you confirm that whatever was approved did not include cooling. Your presentation from the beginning of last year did not have it. The main issue is the cost sharing between the US and Russia. Also I understand CMS will bare part of the cost. From communications I’ve received, from Armando, I understand Dubna feels it has contributed enough by contributing in kind manpower to the construction of the cooling loops. What is the plan for finalizing the cost sharing?

From Bob Definitely it was not in at the beginning of the year, but I was pretty sure that we included 50k in 2020 for the final RRB approval for October. We definitely discussed it in the RMO during the summer. So it should be there for 2020. Concerning cost sharing, the big thing is between the CSCs and CMS. Indeed, Dubna contributed a couple of techs to the main shop to work on the cooling circuits, so they are "golden" from that point of view. There is no other funding source in the CSCs than the US, so the US and CMS will have to do some kind of sharing. I don't think that was ever negotiated. I've attached slides from a presentation in June showing the 50k for cooling in 2020 (as well as electronics spares (in-kind) which we included for the first time).

2) M&OB CSC budget We have a preliminary M&OB budget that created in the past, probably by Bob. Aside from cooling costs do we want to make any updates to those numbers for 2021?

From Bob There should be cooling plus the spares for the upgraded HV system. The new ME1/1 HV was considered as an upgrade, but not the spares. That should be already in the budget. Can you send links to the current budgets?

From Bob after seeing numbers OK. The 62k for electronics included 43k for the upgraded HV spares from PNPI, There was an additional 19k for 19 and 20 that brought the total to 62k. The 19k went down to 14k after the shutdown (4k Dubna, 10k US).

3) M&OB cost sharing My understanding is the sharing is negotiated between the various CSC countries and in Russia’s case there are several funding sources. We have the 2019 sharing between US, RDMS-DMS and RDMS-Russia as an example. However the Russian component includes money for the voltage distribution system that was one time. The Russian total was 65k but that time goes from 62k to 14k in the future. a) Bob: Do you have a more exact breakdown on what the Russian 65k was spent on. b) Bob: Does the Russian contribution reduce by 48k in the future and from which of the two Russian sources c) Bob: What is the difference between RDMS-DMS and RDMS-Russia?

d) At this point do we renegotiate the cost sharing for 2021? Also 2021 should probably include Tomsk SU and China.

From Bob I had, at one point, 43k from PNPI for 2019 and 2020 for HV spares. The rest was always Dubna at around 20k. It should reduce by 43k for 2021 on, and be around 20k or so, from Dubna. The main difference is the PNPI is Russia and Dubna was DMS.

M&OB for the CSCs always just included the US contribution plus a small contribution from Dubna (~20-30K; numberst that I would get from Vladimir Karjavine). Tomsk got involved with the upgrade and previously never contributed to M&OB. Ditto for China. PNPI have always said that they contribute some manpower (US pays for their local CERN expenses), and refused to consider any other contribution. We could try to get something out of Tomsk, but since we can't even get their technicians any more, it isn't clear how well that would work. (I still have to try to talk with Vladimr Ivantchenko; we didn't have a good overlap when I was at CERN last month.)

4) Is China planning to make a contribution to the Upgrade that should be listed? If so, their representative is responsive and I can just contact them and ask them about it.

From Bob China is contributing 1/2 a technician for 6 months next year.

5) Upgrade Darien: The upgrade budget is for all phase 2. When will we have final enough number concerning the NSF contributions to LS3 that we can enter them?

Darien: Could you update me with a final number on the percentage of the OTMB item we have/will accomplished for 2019.

The LS3 numbers should already be in the Upgrade sheets.

Sent information with current status on cooling and other components of M&OB budget to Anna
Anna confirmed and sent original table
Darien sent information on sharing of cooling loan which is to be between US and CMS

2019 12 12

RM budget discussion
Rest of discussion
Urgent items are finding out Dubna M&OB contribution for 2021 and cooling loan cost sharing

RM budget table update
Updated tables with information above

RM cooling loan email
Emailed Armando on loan

2019 12 13

RM cooling loan
Armando dumped it back on me

* RM Dubna M&OB email * Emailed group leader about M&OB contribution

2019 12 14

Book CERN travel

2019 12 15

Submit letters of recommendation

2019 12 16

UW CMS meeting
Work on and review DOE presentation plots

RM M&OB update loan status
Updated cooling and VTTX loan table and corresponding M&OB table
Need to work out cooling loan sharing with CMS TC

2019 12 18

RM M&OB Dubna status
Received detailed table of contribution
Much larger than typical
Need to discuss with Bob, Darian, Anna

2019 12 19

RM CSC people BU and Davis
Updated BU
Update with engineers if in people database
Need to update Davis
Waiting for input from Anna on what to do with 2020 authors who completed CMS work in 2019

2019 12 20

CSC Front vs back efficiency
Slight drop in efficiency near edge of chamber
Low statistics and may be effected by problem that you must impose a found but unmatched segment requirement on missed segments

Topic revision: r82 - 2020-01-03 - MattHerndon

Main

Webs

Public webs

Welcome Guest

- Cern Search
- TWiki Search
- Google Search
Main All webs

Copyright &© 2008-2024 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
or Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? use Discourse or Send feedback

Daily web log book

Contents

2019 01 02

2019 01 03

2019 01 04

2019 01 07

2019 01 08

2019 01 09

2019 01 10

2019 01 11

2019 01 14

2019 01 15

2019 01 16

2019 01 18

2019 01 18

2019 01 22

2019 01 24

2019 01 25

2019 01 28

2019 01 29

2019 01 30

2019 01 31

2019 02 01

2019 02 03

2019 02 04

2019 02 05

2019 02 06

2019 02 07

2019 02 08

2019 02 09

2019 02 11

2019 02 12

2019 02 13

2019 02 14

2019 02 15

2019 02 18

2019 02 19

2019 02 20

2019 02 21

2019 02 22

2019 04 07

2019 04 08

2019 04 09

2019 04 10

2019 04 11

2019 04 12

2019 04 13

2019 04 15

2019 04 16

2019 04 17

2019 04 18

2019 04 19

2019 04 22

2019 04 23

2019 04 25

2019 04 29

2019 04 30

2019 05 02

2019 05 03

2019 05 06

2019 05 08

2019 05 09

2019 05 10

2019 05 13

2019 05 14

2019 05 15

2019 05 16

2019 05 17

2019 05 18

2019 05 20

2019 05 21

2019 05 22

2019 05 23

2019 05 24

2019 05 28

2019 05 29

2019 05 30

2019 05 31

2019 06 03

2019 06 04