[A1n_d2n] [EXTERNAL] Re: Parameter file checkout (and 'param-check.pl' checker script)

Tue Dec 22 23:16:18 EST 2020

Hi Brad,

I merged in your  changes.

Best,
Sylvester

> On Dec 22, 2020, at 10:05 PM, Brad Sawatzky <brads at jlab.org> wrote:
> 
> I pushed this up to the ANL GitLab repo and made a pull request to get
> it merged in the main repo.  I'll let Sylvester do the merge just to
> maintain our standardized approval/review path.  Bill has a pending
> merge request in the queue too.
> 
> In the interim, interested parties can grab the script this way:
>  wget https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__eicweb.phy.anl.gov_Sawatzky_hallc-5Freplay_-2D_blob_param-2Dcheck_CALIBRATION_param-2Dcheck.pl&d=DwIGaQ&c=CJqEzB1piLOyyvZjb8YUQw&r=BiQgYHr0DbfJNsNM2SdXVw&m=ziqY5_1PJ4X98OGcWqTCiZZNrgyjjQ0H-Mhgj-9ObME&s=Aj2AZjl8219SX6t6qyi7cFytFq-FhiOBqMjUVULlOCw&e= 
>  chmod a+x param-check.pl  # make it executable
>  ./param-check --help      # run it and display 'help'
> More instructions/info are included at the bottom of this email.
> 
> 
> The script was written s part of a sanity check of the parameter files
> before we kick off a larger scale replay of the Pol-He3 runs.  In
> general I think the PARAM files (from an up-to-date pull on our main
> hallc-replay repo) look OK.  I do have some observations/questions
> below though.
> 
> I'd appreciate if the students would skim the comment list below for
> detectors they calibrated and confirm/verify that:
>  - The noted 'issue/question' is not a really a problem (and let me
>    know why).
>  - The noted file is an old/historical file that we are not using and
>    don't have to worry about.  (In that case, we should consider 
>    'git rm <file>' along with a good comment to remove such outdated
>    files.  (They can always be retrieved from the git history later if
>    desired.)
> 
> Please run "param-check.pl -v 'yourfile.param'" on your detector's param
> files and verify for yourself whether the vales (and variation, etc) in
> your calibration file look correct.
> 
> You may also want to use the '--compare' feature of the param-checker.pl
> script to look at old vs new calibration files and convince yourself
> that the changes are reasonable and make sense to you.
> 
> 
> 
> =================================================================================
> HMS observations
>  ./param-check.pl -v PARAM/HMS/*/*.param |m
> =================================================================================
> 
> PARAM/HMS/CAL/hcal_calib_phase1_2.param
> PARAM/HMS/CAL/hcal_calib_phase3.param
>  - large variations in hcal_neg_gain_cor, hcal_pos_gain_cor
> 
> PARAM/HMS/CER/hcer_geom.param
>  - hcer_num_regions = 3 ; This value is from the 6 GeV era? -- do we care?
> 
> PARAM/HMS/DC/hdc_tzero_per_wire_*.param
>  - double check these, particularly the outliers
> 
> 
> PARAM/HMS/HODO/hhodo_calib_1267.param
>  - c1-* params have large spread -- is this normal/reasonable?
> 
> PARAM/HMS/HODO/hhodo_calib.param
>  - hhodo_pos_sigma has a bunch of '100' vals -- is this effectively
>    undefined?  Are they all OK?
> 
> 
> =================================================================================
> SHMS param file observations
>  ./param-check.pl -v PARAM/SHMS/*/*.param |m
> =================================================================================
> PARAM/SHMS/CAL/pcal_calib_6619.param
> PARAM/SHMS/CAL/pcal_calib_7109.param
>  - Many blocks have a zero gain...  presumably due to insufficient
>    coverage for calibration?
>  - Is this a problem?  If no, why not?
> 
> PARAM/SHMS/CAL/pcal_calib_9589.param
>  - Test file?  (Might still be better stopgap than the above since a
>    'default' gain of 37 is used for uncalibrated blocks -- at least
>    they can contribute something?
> 
> PARAM/SHMS/CAL/pcal_calib.param
>  - Considerably better coverage (many runs merged)
>  - Some significant outliers, but most believable calib so far.
>  - Is this the 'final' our entire pol-he3 runset?
> 
> PARAM/SHMS/DC/pdc_tzero_per_wire_7109.param
>  - Large values are presumably defaults (ie calibration failed?)
>  - Are these OK?
> 
> PARAM/SHMS/GEN/ptracking.param
>  - broken commenting, fixed
> 
> PARAM/SHMS/HGCER/phgcer_geom.param
>  - Still has "FIXME! Waiting for numbers from detector" in it.
>  - Does it really need 'fixing' or are the values confirmed?
> 
> 
> PARAM/SHMS/HODO/phodo_calib.param
>  - Don't understand what these params do, are all the zeros OK?
>    phodo_neg_invadc_adc, phodo_neg_invadc_offset
>    phodo_pos_invadc_adc, phodo_pos_invadc_offset
>  - These have lots of near zero elements, then a bunch of '100'
>    (default?) values
>    phodo_neg_sigma, phodo_pos_sigma
> 
> PARAM/SHMS/HODO/phodo_Vpcalib.param  (OLD file)
> PARAM/SHMS/HODO/phodo_TWcalib.param  (OLD file)
>  - "pTDC_threshold=120 ;units of mV"
>    - This seems high, is this actually used anywhere in the code?
> 
> ** NOTE: The SHMS Hodo calibration files are a known work in progress.
>     The above param files are not the ones we'll use for a pol-he3
>     replay.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> =============================================================
> This is the commit with info on the param-checker.pl script.
> =============================================================
> 
> commit c7042c51f62b1dfcb1ea5101ba8141143a5f06db
> Author: Brad Sawatzky <brads at jlab.org>
> Date:   Tue Dec 22 21:45:06 2020 -0500
> 
>    Add a 'PARAM file validator/checker' script under CALIBRATION/
> 
>    - This evovled from a bit of a hack to sanity check PARAM/ files
>      for reasonable formatting and values.  Given the variety of
>      non-standardized parameter file formats there are some assumptions
>      and heuristics used allow this script to parse general files.
> 
>    - It checks the following:
>      - general formatting
>        'param = val'
>        'param = <array>'
>        'param = <simple formula>'
>      - watches that data in a parameter array have the same type
>        (ie. number or string string and not a mix)
>      -
> 
>    - It can provide some crude sanity check statistics on arrays of data
>      - It computes mean and std dev and will flag outliers
>        ** IT IS UP TO THE USER TO INVESTIGATE AND DETERMINE IF THE
>           OUTLIERS ARE OK.  IN MANY INSTANCES THEY ARE FINE/EXPECTED **
> 
>    - It can be used to compare two parameter files.  For example, an 'old
>      calibration' file (and a 'new calibration' file, or files that have
>      been calibrated against different sets of runs.
>      - For example:
>        ~/param-check.pl -c hhodo_Vpcalib_3408.param hhodo_Vpcalib_4192.param
>      - It will print out similar statistics on the differences.  Often the
>        changes should not be large and/or they may be a fairly constant shift
>        for all parameters.
> 
>    - Examples:
>      - Check files for basic formatting/outliers
>          param-check.pl PARAM/HMS/*/*.param | less
>      - Check files for formatting/outliers and reprint values in
>        'standardized' format.  Sometimes helpful.
>          param-check.pl -v PARAM/HMS/*/*.param | less
>      - Compare two files:
>          param-check.pl -v -c hhodo_Vpcalib_3408.param hhodo_Vpcalib_4192.param  | less
> 
>    - Here is the 'param-check.pl -h' help text (FWIW):
> 
>        Usage: CALIBRATION/param-check.pl <files>
> 
>        Parse and compare hcana parameter (PARAM/*.param) files.
> 
>        You'll want to run this on a terminal that supports color.
> 
>        By default, each file will sanity checked individually.  Parsing
>        errors will be flagged, and (array only!) data that contain values
>        more than 'maxsigma' (10) std.dev away from the mean will be flagged.
> 
>        Add '-v' to print out all parameters in a standardized format.
> 
>        Two files (ie. before and after new calibration) can be compared with the
>        '-c' option.  Differences are computed and evaluated between parameter
>        values.
> 
>        ** NOTE: Many flagged outliers are OK.  It is up to /you/ to understand
>                 what is OK (and why) and what is a problem/error!
> 
>        FLAGS:
>        -c | --compare    (Requires 2 files as arguments)
>        -m | --maxsigma   (Warn if sigma exceeds value [10])
>        -v | --verbose
>        -h | --help
> 
> -- 
> Brad Sawatzky, PhD <brads at jlab.org>  -<>-  Jefferson Lab / Hall C / C111
> Ph: 757-269-5947  -<>-  Fax: 757-269-5235  -<>- Pager: brads-page at jlab.org
> The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new
>  discoveries, is not "Eureka!" but "That's funny..."   -- Isaac Asimov