[Clas12_rgb] pass-2 review draft of charge & work plan

silvia at jlab.org silvia at jlab.org
Wed Oct 19 02:32:51 EDT 2022


Dear all,
a draft of the charge for the pass-2 review was circulated yesterday.
It could still change (the official one should come out tomorrow), but I'd
say we should get ready for it to be as you see here below, at the end of
this email.
Here is my plan of work needed to address each point:

1) we need one "golden" run to be fully processed in monitoring mode, and
the monitoring plots should be produced. For the alignment part, we should
recover the plots done during the DC and CD alignments.
And, as I wrote yesterday, we should have some relevant plots from the
various analyses, comparing the performances of pass1 versus the two
pass-2 reconstructions.

2) as soon as final touches to the calibrations are done (I am calibrating
one ET run for CND today, and I think for the rest all should be ok), we
can run TWO pass0+timelines, with 20 files/run, with the two versions of
coatjava.

3) Florian has been in charge with checking HV statuses, and I'd hope that
all is in good shape (Florian please confim). We should run some MC
simulations using the new coatjavas, and compare to data. I could run some
exclusive pi0 jobs, for instance, but I am not sure that the statistics of
the 15 cooked runs could be enough, for this channel, for a meaningful
comparison. Anyone has MC already cooked with the new releases? Or who
could have simulations done for his channel by Oct 28th?

4-5-6-7 should be ok, Zhiwen will need to provide feedback for 5 and 6,
cross-checking with Nathan and Raffaella.

Please give me your feedback as soon as possible.
Thanks a lot and best regards,
Silvia

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Review Charge:

Charge #1: Is the quality of detector calibration and alignment adequate
to achieve the performance specifications foreseen for CLAS12 or
achievable at the current time, given the “state of the art” calibration,
alignment and reconstruction algorithms?

Charge #2: Is data quality a function of run number or time for the data
set proposed for pass2 cooking stable and understood? Have runs been
classified in terms of type (empty target, calibration, special,
production, 
) and quality (golden run, known issues found during Pass1,

), and is a detailed list available? Based on Pass1 cooking, have all
CLAS12 subsystem’s performances been understood and issues identified?

Charge #3: Has an ‘HW status’ table to be used in the MC simulation been
compiled? Do MC simulations include CD? How MC simulations do compare to
data in terms of resolution?

Charge #4: Are analysis plans for the data set developed at adequate
levels? Is the list of planned skims defined, and tested running analysis
trains on preliminary data? Are preliminary analysis results for the main
reaction channels and observable available and consistent with
expectations? Is all ancillary information (helicity, Faraday Cup, 
)
available and understood? Have physics analyses been prioritized and
requirements identified and verified they are fulfilled by the Pass2
reconstruction software?

Charge #5: are the data processing tools that will be used adequate for
the proposed processing task? Is the data management plan (staging area,
tape destination, directory structure, logs,
) defined and appropriate
given the available resources? Is the estimate of processing time per
event available and resources needed to complete the task sound?

Charge #6: Have the tools for monitoring the quality of the cooking output
and identify/correct failures been defined and ready to be used?

Charge #7: Is the manpower adequate for the proposed data processing?




More information about the Clas12_rgb mailing list