Does tripFixer and sync only need the tagger and scalar banks (just like gflux) If this is so, then it would be trivial to run sync and tripFixer and gflux on the "flux skim" I am making. Does anyone know this? <br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Alexander Ostrovidov <<a href="mailto:ostrov@hadron.physics.fsu.edu">ostrov@hadron.physics.fsu.edu</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote">
<br>
Hi, Johann and Diane,<br>
<br>
Here is an attempt to explain what I was talking about at the meeting today. I'm worried<br>
that trip files do not contain enough information to label truncated scaler intervals (at the<br>
beginning/end of split files) as "good" or "bad" (i.e., beam trip) when they are simply<br>
merged together without re-running sync/tripFixer on these scaler intervals first.<br>
<br>
Sure, there are obvious cases (when beam is clearly down). However, there are much<br>
less obvious scaler intervals. For example, look at the following entries from<br>
/work/clas/clasg12/clasg12/gflux/tripfiles/clas_057129.*.trip<br>
<br>
1 374 0 26573389 26652473 79085 10000150 130 126 3882289477 374421317 0.815911<br>
9 125 1 7145395 7224809 79415 10000310 130 126 1392236466 125416013 0.813763<br>
<br>
The first interval is marked as "good" (flag 0 in the 3rd column) and will be counted<br>
by gflux. The second interval is marked "bad" (flag "1") and will be ignored. The big<br>
question is: how can one understand what is the difference between these intervals<br>
just by looking at their corresponding entries in the trip file? Both are 10sec long<br>
(7th column). Both have about 79k events (6th column). Both have the same live time<br>
of 81% (last column). Both have identical times per event 130 126 (columns 8&9).<br>
Other columns are irrelevant (they are sequential interval/event numbers and absolute<br>
clock readings). Just from trip file entries alone, I don't see what makes them so<br>
different. But sync did mark them differently nevertheless.<br>
<br>
Now, let's say we want to merge 2 split intervals from the end of some file<br>
(flag -2) and the beginning of the next file (flag -1).<br>
<br>
7 7 -2 604724 657855 53132 6353673 120 120 78568395 7008397 0.791181<br>
0 8 -1 657856 685600 27745 3646000 131 119 82214454 8008433 0.801625<br>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
x x ? 604724 685600 80877 9999673 xxx 124 82214454 8008433 0.794989<br>
<br>
In the last line, I tried to merge them together. I summed up number of events<br>
and time and recalculated live time and time per event. So, what should I put<br>
in the 3rd column instead of "?" - good or bad? And why? How is the last line<br>
different from either "good" or "bad" intervals above?<br>
<br>
If we want to mark the merged interval as good by hands (numbers do look<br>
good indeed: 80k events in 10sec, 79% live time) then we have to do the same<br>
with the "bad" interval shown above (it also looks good in the trip file). Or we<br>
have to let sync/tripFixer to decide how to label newly-merged scaler intervals<br>
based on their internal logic about beam fluctuations. I just don't want a situation<br>
when some intervals are judged by us and other intervals are judged by sync.<br>
<br>
Another reason we want to rerun at least tripFixer is that we want to group<br>
similar runs (60nA, 65nA, 24nA, major trigger changes). Last time we did all runs<br>
together and, apparently, tripFixer parameters for 24nA runs were overwhelmed<br>
by statistics from 60nA runs. I suspect, this is why a percentage of bad intervals<br>
jumps from ~5% in 60nA runs to ~22% in 24nA. I think it would be safer not to mix<br>
them together this time.<br>
<br>
Sasha<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5">_______________________________________________<br>
G12 mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:G12@jlab.org">G12@jlab.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/g12">https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/g12</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Johann T. Goetz, PhD.<br><a href="mailto:jgoetz@ucla.edu">jgoetz@ucla.edu</a><br>Nefkens Group, UCLA Dept. of Physics & Astronomy<br>Hall-B, Jefferson Lab, Newport News, VA<br>
Office: 757-269-5465 (CEBAF Center F-335)<br>Mobile: 757-768-9999<br><br>