[Hps-analysis] New WABs

[Sho Uemura]

Yes, I made a fix (r4465) to the SVT geometry converter (the carbon fiber 
dimensions were being used in a place I didn't expect), and updated the 
v5-0 LCDD files accordingly (r4467). So the LCDD used by SLIC and the JAR 
used for readout/recon were both affected.

On Sat, 13 Aug 2016, Bradley T Yale wrote:

> Where were the fixes? Did you change the new v5 detector?
>
> ________________________________
> From: Sho Uemura <meeg at slac.stanford.edu>
> Sent: Friday, August 12, 2016 10:36:30 PM
> To: Bradley T Yale
> Cc: hps-analysis at jlab.org
> Subject: Re: [Hps-analysis] New WABs
>
> Looks OK now. SLIC will have to be rerun.
>
> On Fri, 12 Aug 2016, Sho Uemura wrote:
>
>> I think we may have screwed up and broken tracking. Should have tested.
>> Sorry.
>>
>> Fixing, will hopefully figure it out today.
>>
>> On Fri, 12 Aug 2016, Bradley T Yale wrote:
>>
>>> Some pure wab, tritrig, and wab-beam-tri are finishing here, using the new
>>> detector and various fixes:
>>>
>>>
>>> /mss/hallb/hps/production/postTriSummitFixes/recon/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Hps-analysis <hps-analysis-bounces at jlab.org> on behalf of Bradley T
>>> Yale <btu29 at wildcats.unh.edu>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 4:47:42 PM
>>> To: Sho Uemura
>>> Cc: hps-analysis at jlab.org
>>> Subject: Re: [Hps-analysis] New WABs
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks a lot.
>>>
>>> Unleashing it on the farm.
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Sho Uemura <meeg at slac.stanford.edu>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 3:24:47 PM
>>> To: Bradley T Yale
>>> Cc: Maruyama, Takashi; hps-analysis at jlab.org
>>> Subject: Re: New WABs
>>>
>>> New detectors are ready: HPS-EngRun2015-Nominal-v5-0-fieldmap,
>>> HPS-PhysicsRun2016-Nominal-v5-0-fieldmap.
>>>
>>> This detector no longer has carbon fiber dipping past the beam plane (the
>>> "third half-module" that Rafo saw), so WAB conversion rate should be
>>> correct. None of the active material has moved, so there should be no
>>> differences visible in reconstruction.
>>>
>>> On Fri, 5 Aug 2016, Bradley T Yale wrote:
>>>
>>>> Making a half-batch of v9 anyway, just in case (as in, they're already in
>>>> progress...)
>>>>
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: Maruyama, Takashi <tvm at slac.stanford.edu>
>>>> Sent: Friday, August 5, 2016 1:41:59 PM
>>>> To: Uemura, Sho; Bradley T Yale
>>>> Cc: hps-analysis at jlab.org
>>>> Subject: RE: New WABs
>>>>
>>>> No, I don't think so. No effects on the multiple scattering in the Si
>>>> layers or ECal flange/crystal.
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Sho Uemura [mailto:meeg at slac.stanford.edu]
>>>> Sent: Friday, August 05, 2016 9:08 AM
>>>> To: Bradley T Yale
>>>> Cc: hps-analysis at jlab.org; Maruyama, Takashi
>>>> Subject: Re: New WABs
>>>>
>>>> Takashi - do we need to repeat our studies of the multiple scattering in
>>>> GEANT4, so we know the differences between 9.6.p01 and 10.x??
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 5 Aug 2016, Bradley T Yale wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Pure WABs for the new vs. old SLIC/GEANT4 comparison are finishing.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> NEW SLIC (REF/, G4 v. 10.01.p03):
>>>>>
>>>>> /mss/hallb/hps/production/pass6/recon/wab/1pt05/wabv2_10to1_4062dz_HPS
>>>>> -EngRun2015-Nominal-v4-4-fieldmap_3.8-fix_pairs1_*.slcio
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> OLD SLIC (HEAD/, G4 v. 10.01.p02):
>>>>>
>>>>> /mss/hallb/hps/production/pass6/recon/wab/1pt05/wabv2_oldG4_10to1_4062
>>>>> dz_HPS-EngRun2015-Nominal-v4-4-fieldmap_3.8-fix_pairs1_*.slcio
>>>>>
>>>>> Each represents 10k generated files (0.7 barns), 10to1 readout.
>>>>>
>>>>> Both use the updated target thickness (4.062 um), so the version of SLIC
>>>>> should be the only difference between them.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>> From: Sho Uemura <meeg at slac.stanford.edu>
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2016 1:02:54 AM
>>>>> To: Bradley T Yale
>>>>> Cc: hps-analysis at jlab.org; Takashi Maruyama
>>>>> Subject: Re: New WABs
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it possible to do this with both the old and new SLIC?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 4 Aug 2016, Bradley T Yale wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> It's no problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'll go ahead and make them with the updated target thickness (0.0004062
>>>>>> vs. 0.0004375 cm).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>> From: Sho Uemura <meeg at slac.stanford.edu>
>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2016 8:24:02 PM
>>>>>> To: Bradley T Yale
>>>>>> Cc: hps-analysis at jlab.org; Takashi Maruyama
>>>>>> Subject: Re: New WABs
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The events look fine. Normalization hasn't changed much (Rafo's a and
>>>>>> b factors are about the same). Distribution shapes don't look
>>>>>> significantly different.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would be good to have a factor of 10 more of the pure WABs, if it's
>>>>>> easy.
>>>>>> I don't expect it to tell us anything new but it will make things
>>>>>> clearer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 1 Aug 2016, Bradley T Yale wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Unweighted WAB events using the v2 generator have finished recon.
>>>>>>> Everything that contains them are labelled 'wabv2':
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pure WAB:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /mss/hallb/hps/production/pass6/recon/wab/1pt05/wabv2_10to1_HPS-EngR
>>>>>>> un2015-Nominal-v4-4-fieldmap_3.8-fix_pairs1_*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> WAB with background:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /mss/hallb/hps/production/pass6/recon/tritrig-wab-beam-tri/1pt05/tri
>>>>>>> trigv1_NOSUMCUT-wabv2-egsv3-triv2-g4v1_HPS-EngRun2015-Nominal-v4-4-f
>>>>>>> ieldmap_3.8-fix_pairs1_*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The ones with background also contain tritrig without an ESum generator
>>>>>>> cut, to eliminate possible errors from it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Once Takashi finishes tweaking the egs5 procedure to eliminate WAB
>>>>>>> double-counting, I'll rerun everything along with an updated target
>>>>>>> thickness as well, probably in a fresh directory.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Bradley
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Hps-analysis mailing list
>> Hps-analysis at jlab.org
>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hps-analysis
>>
>