<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
</head>
<body>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">Hi Silvia,</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">That’s fine, for the purpose it was made.</div>
<div dir="ltr">May be these points can be made more clear on the slides, so people are not confused.</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">But I do think it’s odd showing that MC reconstructs more tracks than generated, when background is not added.</div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ms-outlook-mobile-signature">
<div><br>
</div>
Get <a href="https://aka.ms/o0ukef">Outlook for iOS</a></div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> silvia <silvia@jlab.org><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, February 16, 2025 2:27:53 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Gagik Gavalian <gavalian@jlab.org><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Clas12 Calcom <clas12_calcom@jlab.org>; Rgc Analysis <rgc_analysis@jlab.org>; Rgc <rgc@jlab.org><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Clas12_calcom] first draft of pass1 review slides</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="BodyFragment"><font size="2"><span style="font-size:11pt;">
<div class="PlainText">Hi Gagik,<br>
first of all, the purpose of this set of slides is to summarize the <br>
conclusions to which we got (Raffaella, you, and I) when we decided <br>
which network was best for RGC Spring23. So one has to focus on the <br>
comparison Spring network vs summer network.<br>
This said, if I recall correctly the numbers in slide 50 compare <br>
with/without AI assisted tracking while the one in slide 53 compares <br>
with/without denoising.<br>
For the efficiencies above 1, I think it comes from the way I ran the <br>
aiTracking code, I recall that there is an option to set the "zero" <br>
point exactly at 1 but I didn't use it to make that plot.<br>
Best regards,<br>
Silvia<br>
<br>
<br>
On 2025-02-14 12:43, Gagik Gavalian wrote:<br>
> Hi Silvia,<br>
> <br>
> This may be an irrelevant question, but something strikes me as odd in<br>
> the slides 50 and 53,<br>
> According to slide 50, the gain in single particle reconstruction<br>
> efficiency (for both charges) is about ~12%<br>
> <br>
> However, on slide 53, at 4 nA, it only shows 2-4% gain in efficiency<br>
> (as far as one can tell from the graph).<br>
> And extrapolated efficiency for 0 nA is above one for the data, which<br>
> I guess normalization was done on AI, so<br>
> it’s the normal procedure.<br>
> However, what’s confusing is that on the MC plots, the efficiency is<br>
> also above one, and it’s not calculated using<br>
> extrapolation, but there is an actual point there. Do we reconstruct<br>
> more tracks in MC when no background is added?<br>
> <br>
> — Gagik Gavalian<br>
> — Staff Scientist<br>
> — Jefferson Lab<br>
> — email: gavalian@jlab.org<br>
> <br>
>> On Feb 14, 2025, at 12:06 PM, silvia via Clas12_calcom<br>
>> <clas12_calcom@jlab.org> wrote:<br>
>> <br>
>> Dear Calcom and RGC,<br>
>> I have prepared a first draft of the slides for the pass1 review:<br>
>> <a href="https://box.in2p3.fr/s/BQHfiJnXY6xKmrA">https://box.in2p3.fr/s/BQHfiJnXY6xKmrA</a><br>
>> If you could please check them, it would be great.<br>
>> Things that will be added shortly:<br>
>> - SIDIS analysis on the test runs<br>
>> - Estimates of computing resources<br>
>> - Back-up slides<br>
>> - whatever has written "to be done" on the slide :-)<br>
>> Thank you all for your contribution!<br>
>> Best regards,<br>
>> Silvia<br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Clas12_calcom mailing list<br>
>> Clas12_calcom@jlab.org<br>
>> <a href="https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/clas12_calcom">https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/clas12_calcom</a><br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</body>
</html>