Reconstruction Algorithm Comparison
 

  » Introduction

  » Monte Carlo sample

  » Processing times



  » Trigger level
      » effective area
      » angular resol. vs energy
      » efficiency
      » energy spectra
      » angular resol. vs declination
      » fakes
      » summay table

      » comparison 9, 21, 80 lines
      » check retriggering


  » Cut set 1
      » effective area
      » angular resol. vs energy
      » efficiency
      » energy spectra
      » angular resol. vs declination
      » fakes
      » summay table

       » comparison 9, 21, 80 lines
      » check retriggering


  »  Event rates  vs  zenith cut
     » corsika events
     » cosmic signal
     » atmospheric neutrinos



  »  Preliminary conclusions
 



 Comments to:
   zornoza@icecube.wisc.edu

Introduction

We show here a comparison among different first-guess reconstruction strategies:

  • Linefit
  • Dipolefit
  • Cluster JAMS*
  • Direct Walk
*Remark: cluster_jams produces a discrete zenith angle distribution, which explains the particular shape of some of the distributions corresponding to this strategy).

We also include results from the muon-llh-reco module fed by each of these first guesses.
The muon-llh-reco result fed by linefit is implicitly assumend when only one strategy is shown.

The comparison is done with different kinds of events:
  • Corsika events
  • Atmospheric neutrinos (Bartol+Naumov)
  • Cosmic neutrinos (E-2)
The magnitudes to be compared are:
  • Effective area
  • Angular resolution
  • Efficiency
  • Fake rate
  • Processing time
We have simulated the 9-line, 21-line and 80-line configurations.

NOTE: There is A LOT of information here, so you can go to the preliminary conclusions for a summary of this (on-going) work.


MC samples



 corsika
 nugen_numu
9 lines (at generation)
 85 - 1.735e9 ()
  105 - 1.915e6 ()
9 lines (retriggered)
 72 - 1.893e9 ()
   79 - 4e5 ()
21 lines (retriggered)
 72 - 1.998e9 ()   80 - 2e5 ()
80 lines
 72 - 1.762e9 ()   78 - 6.14e4 ()
legend: data_set - number of events generated (number of events triggering the detector)

Processing times

In these tables we sow the processing times per call for each of the



dipolefit
linefit
clusterjams
direct walk
llh (dipole)
llh (line)
llh (cjams)
llh (dw)

9 strings
real time (s)
 CPU time (s)
0.000497 0.000518
0.000382 0.000451
0.088036 0.087582
0.006897 0.006747
0.060671 0.060336
0.056960 0.056679
0.062241 0.061593
0.052638 0.052159

21 strings
real time (s) CPU time (s)
0.000485 0.000538
0.000419 0.000538
0.084133 0.083513
0.005437 0.005484
0.054759 0.054444
0.050597 0.050394
0.057006 0.056918
0.042162 0.041792

80 strings
real time (s) CPU time (s)
0.000496 0.000518
0.000380 0.000309
0.071118 0.070558
0.006635 0.006783
0.055136 0.054671
0.054914 0.054731
0.056635 0.056165
0.047390 0.047261