<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto">I would say yes, to pick up 4 cable swaps in Pcal and EC that I found. Cole<div><br><br><div id="AppleMailSignature">Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On Jul 1, 2018, at 4:21 PM, Francois-Xavier Girod <<a href="mailto:fxgirod@jlab.org">fxgirod@jlab.org</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>Dear Raffaella, all<div><br></div><div>Can you please confirm that we should redecode first?</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks</div><div><br></div><div>Best regards </div><div>FX <br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Mon, Jul 2, 2018, 05:12 Raffaella De Vita <<a href="mailto:devita@jlab.org">devita@jlab.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Dear Latifa,<br>
the cooking of run 4013 and 4150 was mostly meant to further validate <br>
the new tag and check the effect of the changes (code/geometry) on <br>
detector calibrations. However, low energy data would certainly give <br>
better sensitivity to the geometry changes as you mentioned. New T0 <br>
calibrations for those runs runs will be needed, though, because using <br>
the event stat time in TBT impacts the T0 in dc calibrations. These were <br>
derived from run 4130 by Latif but would not necessarily apply to the <br>
2.2 GeV data that were recorded long before, because of changes in the <br>
TDC readout windows that were done in between.<br>
What I would suggest is to compile a list of all the runs that you would <br>
like to have cooked both for specific studies and for data analysis and <br>
start the pass0 as soon as possible to check which runs will need to be <br>
re-calibrated.<br>
Best regards,<br>
Raffaella<br>
<br>
<br>
Latifa Elouadrhiri wrote:<br>
> Dear Raffaella,<br>
><br>
> It would be good to add to the list of data processing few files from <br>
> of the 2.2 GeV run also, since we can judge immediately with the <br>
> position and resolution of the elastic peak. This should get better <br>
> with all the changes in particular the geometry.<br>
><br>
> Best regards,<br>
><br>
> Latifa<br>
><br>
><br>
> On 7/1/18 3:35 PM, Raffaella Devita wrote:<br>
>> Dear FX and Will,<br>
>> all the changes we wanted to have in the new release have been merged <br>
>> to the development branch. Can you create a new tag?<br>
>> Since there are major changes, the tag id should be 5b.5.0. It would <br>
>> be good to have a full list of the commits in the release note; also<br>
>> this will be compatible with gemc 4a.2.4.<br>
>> There will be probably a few more updates, beyond what was planned, <br>
>> in the next days from EB development and the swimming API but the tag <br>
>> can be already used for cooking since some validation on MC and real <br>
>> data has already been performed.<br>
>> In particular it would be good to recook run 4013 and 4150. In this <br>
>> cooking, it would be useful to test the new region2 corrected <br>
>> geometry: to do that, the yaml file should be modified to use the <br>
>> service options indicated below.<br>
>> Best regards,<br>
>> Raffaella<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ...<br>
>> services:<br>
>> DCHB:<br>
>> torusMap: Symm_torus_r2501_phi16_z251_24Apr2018.dat<br>
>> solenoidMap: Symm_solenoid_r601_phi1_z1201_2008.dat<br>
>> useStartTime: "true"<br>
>> geomDBVariation: may_2018_engineers<br>
>> constantsDBVariation: calib<br>
>> DCTB:<br>
>> geomDBVariation: may_2018_engineers<br>
>> constantsDBVariation: calib<br>
><br>
<br>
</blockquote></div></div>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>Clas12_software mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:Clas12_software@jlab.org">Clas12_software@jlab.org</a></span><br><span><a href="https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/clas12_software">https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/clas12_software</a></span></div></blockquote></div></body></html>