Muon lifetime measurement experiment

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the measurement of muon lifetime in a university laboratory setting, focusing on the impact of time resolution on the results. Participants explore the methodology of coincidence measurements using plastic scintillators and the implications of systematic uncertainties in the experimental setup.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Experimental/applied

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how to account for time resolution as a systematic error, considering whether to use the standard deviation of a Gaussian fit or to repeat measurements to assess drift.
  • Another suggests folding the exponential function with the resolution function for fitting, noting that time resolution should only be a concern if it is a significant fraction of the muon lifetime.
  • Participants express interest in the specifics of the scintillator setup, including dimensions and detection schemes used in the experiment.
  • One participant highlights the challenges faced due to the quality of equipment available, indicating that the experimental conditions were not ideal.
  • There is a discussion about the importance of conducting stability checks with Monte Carlo simulations to avoid biases in the analysis.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the use of multiple scintillators and the detection of signals from muon decay events.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the best method to account for time resolution as a systematic error. There are multiple perspectives on the experimental setup and analysis techniques, indicating ongoing debate and exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention limitations related to the experimental setup, including the quality of scintillators and the need for Monte Carlo simulations for stability checks. There is also a recognition of potential biases in analysis based on dataset adjustments.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and researchers involved in experimental particle physics, particularly those interested in muon detection and lifetime measurements.

Aleolomorfo
Messages
70
Reaction score
4
TL;DR
How to treat time resolution as a systematic in a muon lifetime measurement?
Hello everybody!

I have a question regarding my physics laboratory at the university. I am performing the measure of muon lifetime. The setup is quite standard (coincidence measurement with plastic scintillators).
My question is about the time resolution. I have tried to see if the time resolution could affect as a systematic my result. To prove this, I have acquired only coinciding events and I measure the difference in time of such signals. Theoretically, it should be zero, but due to many factors this time intervals follow a gaussian distribution. My question is about the way in which I can take into consideration this systematic. Should I take the ##\sigma## of the gaussian fit or should I repeat the measure many times and take as systematic position drift of the coincidence peak?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: geoelectronics
Physics news on Phys.org
The best approach would be to fold the exponential function with your resolution function and then use that in the fit (plus all the other stuff needed). In practice this shouldn't matter unless your time resolution is a large fraction of the muon lifetime.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Aleolomorfo
Aleolomorfo said:
Summary: How to treat time resolution as a systematic in a muon lifetime measurement?

Hello everybody!

I have a question regarding my physics laboratory at the university. I am performing the measure of muon lifetime. The setup is quite standard (coincidence measurement with plastic scintillators).
My question is about the time resolution. I have tried to see if the time resolution could affect as a systematic my result. To prove this, I have acquired only coinciding events and I measure the difference in time of such signals. Theoretically, it should be zero, but due to many factors this time intervals follow a gaussian distribution. My question is about the way in which I can take into consideration this systematic. Should I take the ##\sigma## of the gaussian fit or should I repeat the measure many times and take as systematic position drift of the coincidence peak?

Hi Aleolomorfo.
Muon detection is of great interest to me as well. Would you please describe the scintillator paddle dimensions, spacing and thickness, and mention which coincidence detection scheme is being used? i.e. NIM or student built such as Dr H. Matis' design.

Thanks

George Dowell
 
geoelectronics said:
Hi Aleolomorfo.
Muon detection is of great interest to me as well. Would you please describe the scintillator paddle dimensions, spacing and thickness, and mention which coincidence detection scheme is being used? i.e. NIM or student built such as Dr H. Matis' design.

Thanks

George Dowell

Hello George Dowell,

I have attached the final report where you can find the information you need.

One thing to notice: last year the particle physics laboratory had too many students, so we were chosen to perform the measurement of the muon lifetime with electronic modules and scintillators found quickly around the university. Consequently, they were not the best ones and we had many problems... our job was not so strightforward. But you can extract the main idea behind the experiment.

If you have any question, ask freely!
 

Attachments

  • Like
Likes   Reactions: geoelectronics
Thank you, nice report, well written. The first effort I've seen to capture Cosmic "Ray" muons.

As a hardware person, the difficulties with scintillators and NIM support units is well appreciated.
I liked the part about an impromptu delay line made "of many LEMO cables".

The one I'm working on now is a single 3" X 3" BGO scintillator inside an 800 pound lead shield.

George Dowell
 
Did you do the stability checks with MC? Doing it with the main dataset is problematic - if you change the analysis based on what looks better you can get some biases. It is interesting to see what looks like a systematic trend for muon lifetime as function of bins.
 
mfb said:
Did you do the stability checks with MC? Doing it with the main dataset is problematic - if you change the analysis based on what looks better you can get some biases. It is interesting to see what looks like a systematic trend for muon lifetime as function of bins.

No, we did not. We only used the dataset but I see your point, we should have used MC.
 
Aleolomorfo said:
Hello George Dowell,

I have attached the final report where you can find the information you need.

One thing to notice: last year the particle physics laboratory had too many students, so we were chosen to perform the measurement of the muon lifetime with electronic modules and scintillators found quickly around the university. Consequently, they were not the best ones and we had many problems... our job was not so strightforward. But you can extract the main idea behind the experiment.

If you have any question, ask freely!
Again thanks for the report. I have spent considerable time reading it and several others and also consulted with a moderator to get a better understanding of the aims and the procedure.
From what I see in your paper, you are using multiple organic scintillators at the same time, correct? And recording their coincidences.
In your experiment are the original pulse and the secondary pulse detected in the same scintillator or on two or more? The reason I ask is there are two approaches to working with muons using organic scintillators and I want to understand more.

Thank you.

George Dowell
 
Hello George!

geoelectronics said:
From what I see in your paper, you are using multiple organic scintillators at the same time, correct? And recording their coincidences.

Yes, we use three scintillators at the same time, one over the other. We record a start signal from the passage of a muon in the first and the second scintillator (the events we are interested in are the ones in which the muon stops in the middle scintillator). So the start signal is a coincidence between the upper and the middle scintillator. Then we expect a signal from the decay of the muon. The muon decay mainly in electron/positron and neutrino/antineutrino. We expect a signal (the charged lepton) in the upper or the lower scintillator in a gate of 10 ##\mu s##. This is the main idea.

geoelectronics said:
In your experiment are the original pulse and the secondary pulse detected in the same scintillator or on two or more?

We have always used the same three scintillator
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K