[Halld-offline] Offline Software Meeting Minutes, September 18, 2013

[Mark M. Ito]

Colleagues,

Find the minutes below and at

https://halldweb1.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/GlueX_Offline_Meeting,_September_18,_2013

   -- Mark
___________________________________

GlueX Offline Meeting, September 18, 2013
Minutes

    Present:
      * CMU: Paul Mattione, Curtis Meyer
      * IU: Kei Moriya, Matt Shepherd
      * JLab: Mark Dalton, David Lawrence, Mark Ito (chair), Nathan Sparks,
        Simon Taylor, Beni Zihlmann
      * MIT: Justin Stevens
      * UConn: Alex Barnes

Announcements

     1. The second 12 GeV Software Review will be held November 25 and 26
        at JLab.
     2. We have been asked by Graham Heyes to prepare a Hall-specific data
        management plan. Mark has sent him a draft based heavily on the
        template that Graham has provided.

Review of minutes from the Last Meeting

    We looked at the minutes from the [32]September 4th meeting. Simon
    reported that he has started using the new code from Paul that does a
    better job of handling curling tracks in the CDC.

October Collaboration Meeting

    We went over the proposed [33]agenda for the offline software sessions.
      * Will Levine will give the talk on BCAL reconstruction progress.
      * Paul will cover both the report from the [34]Analysis Workshop and
        the standard ROOT trees generated from his analysis package.
      * Justin will re-cap the use of his BDT software and may cover topics
        from a recent paper from him and Mike Williams on training the BDTs
        to be not only efficient but flat in phase space.
      * Times will have to be re-adjusted.

Software Review Planning

    Curtis led us through the [35]wiki page he and David started to collect
    information on the upcoming review. Items from the discussion:
      * Overall Curtis thought that we were in pretty good shape given the
        progress we have made since the last review.
      * Matt reminded us that we were charged with presenting the user's
        point of view at the last review. Ideas were floated on how to do
        that: video testimonials, experience at the Analysis Workshop, the
        notion that the software is so easy to use that even Jo Dudek can
        do a partial wave analysis.
      * Rolf Ent had convened Division-wide meetings in advance of the last
        review. We have not heard of plans for such meetings this time.
      * Curtis may pump Rolf for more information on what we should expect.
      * Last time we had weekly phone conferences for review planning. We
        ill fire those up after the collaboration meeting.
      * Mark pointed out that we have not done the periodic code profiling
        the committee asked for. Some simple form of this should be do-able
        in advance of the review.
      * Justin volunteered to look at making plots from the data challenge
        data to visually display the statistics we generated. Matt
        suggested looking at, say, an w peak before and after BDT criteria
        are applied.

Update on Generated Information

    Kei followed up on his presentations at two meetings last week, the
    [36]physics meeting and an [37]ad-hoc meeting to discuss issues he
    raised. Action items were formulated at the ad-hoc meeting. See Kei's
    [38]presentation at this meeting for details.

    The situation is still confused. A lot of the discussion was hampered
    by not having key experts in the room. We all know what we want, but
    there seems to be some history that needs unraveling before we get it.
    Those interested are referred to Kei's talks, the ad-hoc meeting page,
    and [39]discussion on the email list. Mark intends to call another
    ad-hoc meeting soon.

b1pi and Single Track Test Failures

    Last week Justin fixed a problem with inconsistency of the CDC code
    with recent changes from Richard to clean up the detector geometry.
    That fixed a class of failures, but we are still not getting successful
    completion of the b1pi and single-track tests. Paul and Simon have both
    seen the likely culprit. The symptom is an event that never completes.
    In addition, the problem is not reproducible. Simon is looking at it.

Data Challenge 2

      * Mark has fired-up the old data challenge 1 jobs on the JLab farm,
        with the identical software, to re-establish the base for
        improvements for DC2.
      * We would like to include beam-related electromagnetic background in
        DC2, among [40]other things, but some study is necessary; the CPU
        costs may be too high. A volunteer to work on this is needed.

    Retrieved from
"https://halldweb1.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/GlueX_Offline_Meeting,_September_18,_2013"

References

   32. 
https://halldweb1.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/GlueX_Offline_Meeting,_September_4,_2013#Minutes
   33. 
https://halldweb1.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/GlueX-Collaboration-Oct-2013
   34. 
https://halldweb1.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/GlueX_Analysis_Workshop_2013
   35. https://halldweb1.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/2013_Software_Review
   36. 
https://halldweb1.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/September_09,_2013,_Physics_Working_Group
   37. 
https://halldweb1.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/Particle_Decay_Chain_Meeting,_September_11,_2013
   38. https://halldweb1.jlab.org/wiki/images/3/39/2013-09-18-generated.pdf
   39. 
https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/halld-offline/2013-September/thread.html
   40. https://halldweb1.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/Data_Challenge_2:_Ideas