Analysis of Resolution Study and Charge Scans on 17th Feb 2017
Detailed analysis conducted on 17th Feb 2017 includes resolution calculations, charge scans, attenuation comparisons, and improvements in data fitting. The study compares measured resolutions with predicted scaling, examines the impact of additional information on fitting, and explores peak shifts in sample jump waveforms. Geometric resolution in charge scans and IPA resolution fitting are discussed, providing valuable insights into the data analysis process.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Resolution Study -17th Feb 2017 N. Blaskovic, T. Bromwich, R. Ramjiawan
Outline 17/02/17 Day shift Resolution calculations for: Charge scans measured resolutions compared with predicted scaling 1/q. Attenuation scans compared with predicted logarithmic scaling. Looking at improvements from adding X information to the fitting. (With FONT 5A #4 as board 1 (IPY), and FONT 5 #1 as board 2 (IPX).)
Permanent Sample Jump Filename: jitRun17_0dB_0.55_Board2_170217 Reference signal shows two families of peaks, peak permanently shifts after 194 triggers for both boards. Single-trigger sample jumps at triggers: (X) 20, 76 and (Y) 130, 183. IP (X) IP (Y)
Jitter Run Waveforms (X) jitRun4_0dB_0.55_Board2_170217, waveforms for X. Sample numbers used: 61:68. 9 triggers cut from 400 total triggers. IPA(X) IPC(X) IPB(X)
Jitter Run Waveforms (Y) jitRun4_0dB_0.55_Board2_170217, waveforms for Y. Sample numbers used: 44:51. Sample early in the waveform as BPF. 8 triggers cut from 400 total triggers. IPA(Y) IPC(Y) IPB(Y)
Jitter Run Waveforms: Reference Signal Ref(Y) Ref(X) Reference signal sampled at 47. Reference peak at sample 46. Can see single trigger sample jumps, removed during analysis.
Geometric Resolution Charge Scan 130 120 Orange point, has saturating reference: reference sampled later (50). (50), see appendix. Orange point, has saturating reference: reference sampled later 110 100 Resolution (nm) 90 Charge Scan 1 80 Charge Scan 2 70 60 50 40 450 650 850 1050 1250 1450 1650 1850 Charge (ADCs)
IPA Resolution Fitting to Y information IPA Resolution Fitting to Y 70 65 60 55 Resolution (nm) 50 I'/q, 1/q 45 I'/q, Q'/q, 1/q 40 I'/q, Q'/q, Self Q'/q, 1/q 35 30 25 450 650 850 1050 1250 1450 1650 1850 Charge (ADCs)
IPB Resolution Fitting to Y information IPB Resolution Fittting to Y 70 65 60 55 Resolution (nm) 50 I'/q, 1/q 45 I'/q, Q'/q, 1/q 40 I'/q, Q'/q, Self Q'/q, 1/q 35 30 25 450 650 850 1050 1250 1450 1650 1850 Charge (ADCs)
IPC Resolution Fitting to Y information IPC Resolution Fitting to Y 33 31 29 Resolution (nm) 27 I'/q, 1/q 25 I'/q, Q'/q, 1/q I'/q, Q'/q, Self Q'/q, 1/q 23 21 19 450 650 850 1050 1250 1450 1650 1850 Charge (ADCs)
Improvement to Resolution by also Fitting to X Difference in resolution = resolution (fitting to Y) resolution (fitting to X and Y) in nm. Plots of resolution (fitting to X and Y) in appendix. Improvements to resolution from X appear to scale with charge. IPA 7 6 Difference in Resolution (nm) 5 4 3 2 1 0 450 650 850 1050 1250 1450 1650 1850 Charge (ADCs)
Improvement to Resolution by also Fitting to X Difference in resolution = resolution (fitting to Y) resolution (fitting to X and Y) in nm. Plots of resolution (fitting to X and Y) in appendix. Improvements to resolution from X appear to scale with charge. IPB 7 Difference between Resolutions (nm) 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 450 650 850 1050 1250 1450 1650 1850 Charge (ADCs)
Improvement to Resolution by also Fitting to X Difference in resolution = resolution (fitting to Y) resolution (fitting to X and Y) in nm. Plots of resolution (fitting to X and Y) in appendix. Improvements to resolution from X appear to scale with charge. IPC 3 Difference between Resolution (nm) 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 450 650 850 1050 1250 1450 1650 1850 Charge (ADCs)
Attenuation Scan Geometric Method 10000 1000 Resolution (nm) Trend-line based on points between 20 dB to 50 dB 100 10 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Attenuation (dB)
Deviation from trend-line Geometric Fractional Deviation from Resolution Prediction based on 20 50 dB 1.4 1.2 1 Resolution Deviation (nm) 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 -0.2 Attenuation (dB)
Attenuation Scan (Y) Fitting to I /q, 1/q 10000 1000 Resolution (nm) IPA 100 IPB IPC 10 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Attenuation (dB)
Fitting to I/q, 1/q Fractional Deviation from Resolution Prediction based on 20 50 dB 3 Fractional Deviation from Predicted Resolution IPA IPB IPC 2.5 2 1.5 (nm) 1 0.5 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 -0.5 Attenuation (dB)
Attenuation Scan (Y) Fitting to I /q, Q /q, 1/q 10000 1000 Resolution (nm) IPA 100 IPB IPC 10 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Attenuation (dB)
Fitting to I/q, Q/q, 1/q Fractional Deviation from Resolution (Prediction based on 20 50 dB) 3 Fraction Deviation from Predicted Resolution IPA IPB IPC 2.5 2 1.5 (nm) 1 0.5 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 -0.5 Attenuation (dB)
Attenuation Scan (Y) Fitting to I /q, Q /q, 1/q, Self Q /q 10000 1000 Resolution (nm) IPA 100 IPB IPC 10 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Attenuation (dB)
Fitting to I/q, Q/q, Self Q/q, 1/q Fractional Deviation from Resolution (Prediction based on 20 50 dB) 2.5 IPA IPB IPC Fractional Deviation from Predicted 2 1.5 Resolution (nm) 1 0.5 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 -0.5 Attenuation (dB)
jitRun2 AQD0FF Scan1 Fitting method: best resolution calculation at 0.55x1010 charge. Samples used: (Y) 44:51, (X) 61:68, Ref 47. 14 triggers out of 400 cut (31, 93, 138, 139, 168, 201, 210, 226, 301, 302, 321, 326, 334, 351) Fitting to: Y (4,6,7 parameters) Fitting to: X and Y (6,10,11 parameters) I'/q and 1/q: IPA =0.0454+/-0.0023um : IPB = 0.0404+/-0.0020um : IPC = 0.0220+/-0.0011um I'/q and 1/q: IPA = 0.0448+/-0.0022um : IPB = 0.0399+/-0.0020um : IPC = 0.0215+/-0.0011um I'/q, Q'/q and 1/q: IPA = 0.0373+/-0.0019um : IPB = 0.0331+/- 0.0017um : IPC = 0.0192+/-0.0010um I'/q, Q'/q and 1/q: IPA = 0.0366+/-0.0018um : IPB = 0.0316+/-0.0016um : IPC = 0.0184+/-0.0009um I'/q, Q'/q, Self Q'/q,1/q: IPA = 0.0343+/-0.0017um : IPB = 0.0322+/-0.0016um : IPC =0.0188+/-0.0009um I'/q, Q'/q, Self Q'/q,1/q: IPA = 0.0330+/-0.0017um : IPB = 0.0307+/-0.0015um : IPC = 0.0179+/-0.0009um
Summary Geometric fitting Scaled approximately as predicted with charge Didn t scale with attenuation as predicted down to 0 dB Fitting method IPA and IPB resolution showed increasing resolution with decreasing charge (but not scaling as 1/q). IPC resolution showed much less sensitivity to charge. IPC shows especially bad scaling of resolution with attenuation measured resolution approximately twice predicted resolution at 0 dB. Fitting to X, Y resolution Improvement to resolution (for fitting to X as well) appears to scale with charge for IPA and IPB, but offers little improvement in IPC (as already has much lower resolution?).
Saturating Reference jitRun19_0dB Charge 0.35x1010
IPA Resolution Fitting to X and Y information IPA Resolution Fitting with X and Y 65 60 55 Resolution (nm) 50 I'/q, 1/q 45 I'/q, Q'/q, 1/q 40 I'/q, Q'/q, Self Q'/q, 1/q 35 30 25 450 650 850 1050 1250 1450 1650 1850 Charge (ADCs)
IPB Resolution Fitting to X and Y information IPB Resolution Fitting to X and Y 70 65 60 55 Resolution (nm) 50 I'/q, 1/q 45 I'/q, Q'/q, 1/q I'/q, Q'/q, Self Q'/q, 1/q 40 35 30 25 450 650 850 1050 1250 1450 1650 1850 Charge (ADCs)
IPC Resolution Fitting to X and Y information IPCY Resolution Fitting to X and Y 31 29 Resolution (nm) 27 I'/q, 1/q 25 I'/q, Q'/q, 1/q I'/q, Q'/q, Self Q'/q, 1/q 23 21 19 450 650 850 1050 Charge (ADCs) 1250 1450 1650 1850
