<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Exchange Server">
<!-- converted from text --><style><!-- .EmailQuote { margin-left: 1pt; padding-left: 4pt; border-left: #800000 2px solid; } --></style>
</head>
<body>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<style type="text/css" style="">
<!--
p
{margin-top:0;
margin-bottom:0}
-->
</style>
<div dir="ltr">
<div id="x_divtagdefaultwrapper" style="font-size:12pt; color:#000000; background-color:#FFFFFF; font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">
<p>Up until yesterday.<br>
</p>
</div>
<hr tabindex="-1" style="display:inline-block; width:98%">
<div id="x_divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000" style="font-size:11pt"><b>From:</b> Sho Uemura <meeg@slac.stanford.edu><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, August 4, 2016 1:21:59 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Bradley T Yale<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Stepan Stepanyan; hps-analysis@jlab.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Hps-analysis] New WABs</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
</div>
<font size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;">
<div class="PlainText">I'm out of touch - how long have we been using 10.01.p02?<br>
<br>
On Thu, 4 Aug 2016, Bradley T Yale wrote:<br>
<br>
> 5x more WABs are done using the 10.01.p03 version:<br>
><br>
><br>
> /mss/hallb/hps/production/pass6/recon/wab/1pt05/wabv2_10to1_4062dz_*<br>
><br>
><br>
> where "4062" refers to the updated target thickness (in nm).<br>
><br>
> So to clarify, the original 100 wabv2 files in that directory use SLIC v10.01.p02, (w/ original thickness), and files 101-500 (as labelled above) use 10.01.p03 and the new thickness.<br>
><br>
> The rest of the new ones (501-1000) are in progress, and I can match these using the old version + new target thickness as well. WABs are pretty cheap, as suggested.<br>
><br>
> ________________________________<br>
> From: Hps-analysis <hps-analysis-bounces@jlab.org> on behalf of Sho Uemura <meeg@slac.stanford.edu><br>
> Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2016 10:50:00 AM<br>
> To: Stepan Stepanyan<br>
> Cc: hps-analysis@jlab.org<br>
> Subject: Re: [Hps-analysis] New WABs<br>
><br>
> I think running WABs is pretty cheap ("10x" just matches the amount of<br>
> wabv1 we had), and that is one of the validation checks we need.<br>
><br>
> But yes, before we use the new SLIC for any big production we need to<br>
> check everything.<br>
><br>
> On Thu, 4 Aug 2016, Stepan Stepanyan wrote:<br>
><br>
>> May be before running x10 of WAB we should make some small amount of<br>
>> simulations to validate it.<br>
>><br>
>> On 8/4/16 10:26 AM, Sho Uemura wrote:<br>
>>> New SLIC is 10.01.p03. I don't know what validation has been done or is<br>
>>> planned to make sure none of the physics we care about has changed.<br>
>>><br>
>>> On Thu, 4 Aug 2016, Maurik Holtrop wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>>> Has the version of GEANT4 changed between the old and new SLIC?<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> If it has, then I think there is a big reason to have enough data with<br>
>>>> both versions to make a meaningful comparison.<br>
>>>> We can discuss if this would also be needed as well if only the target<br>
>>>> thickness changed. I would think probably not?<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> - Maurik<br>
>>>><br>
>>>>> On Aug 4, 2016, at 9:40 AM, Bradley T Yale <btu29@wildcats.unh.edu><br>
>>>>> wrote:<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Sure.<br>
>>>>> The old SLIC is still around, but it should be up-to-date with this one<br>
>>>>> though.<br>
>>>>> I think it was just future stability that led to moving away from the<br>
>>>>> HEAD revision (hopefully Jeremy can comment).<br>
>>>>> From: Sho Uemura <meeg@slac.stanford.edu><br>
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2016 1:02:54 AM<br>
>>>>> To: Bradley T Yale<br>
>>>>> Cc: hps-analysis@jlab.org; Takashi Maruyama<br>
>>>>> Subject: Re: New WABs<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Is it possible to do this with both the old and new SLIC?<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> On Thu, 4 Aug 2016, Bradley T Yale wrote:<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>>> It's no problem.<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> I'll go ahead and make them with the updated target thickness (0.0004062<br>
>>>>>> vs. 0.0004375 cm).<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> ________________________________<br>
>>>>>> From: Sho Uemura <meeg@slac.stanford.edu><br>
>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2016 8:24:02 PM<br>
>>>>>> To: Bradley T Yale<br>
>>>>>> Cc: hps-analysis@jlab.org; Takashi Maruyama<br>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: New WABs<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> The events look fine. Normalization hasn't changed much (Rafo's a and b<br>
>>>>>> factors are about the same). Distribution shapes don't look<br>
>>>>>> significantly<br>
>>>>>> different.<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> Would be good to have a factor of 10 more of the pure WABs, if it's<br>
>>>>>> easy.<br>
>>>>>> I don't expect it to tell us anything new but it will make things<br>
>>>>>> clearer.<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> On Mon, 1 Aug 2016, Bradley T Yale wrote:<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>>> Unweighted WAB events using the v2 generator have finished recon.<br>
>>>>>>> Everything that contains them are labelled 'wabv2':<br>
>>>>>>><br>
>>>>>>><br>
>>>>>>> Pure WAB:<br>
>>>>>>><br>
>>>>>>> /mss/hallb/hps/production/pass6/recon/wab/1pt05/wabv2_10to1_HPS-EngRun2015-Nominal-v4-4-fieldmap_3.8-fix_pairs1_*<br>
>>>>>>><br>
>>>>>>><br>
>>>>>>> WAB with background:<br>
>>>>>>><br>
>>>>>>> /mss/hallb/hps/production/pass6/recon/tritrig-wab-beam-tri/1pt05/tritrigv1_NOSUMCUT-wabv2-egsv3-triv2-g4v1_HPS-EngRun2015-Nominal-v4-4-fieldmap_3.8-fix_pairs1_*<br>
>>>>>>><br>
>>>>>>><br>
>>>>>>> The ones with background also contain tritrig without an ESum generator<br>
>>>>>>> cut, to eliminate possible errors from it.<br>
>>>>>>><br>
>>>>>>> Once Takashi finishes tweaking the egs5 procedure to eliminate WAB<br>
>>>>>>> double-counting, I'll rerun everything along with an updated target<br>
>>>>>>> thickness as well, probably in a fresh directory.<br>
>>>>>>><br>
>>>>>>><br>
>>>>>>> -Bradley<br>
>>>>>>><br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>>>> Hps-analysis mailing list<br>
>>>>> Hps-analysis@jlab.org<br>
>>>>> <a href="https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hps-analysis">https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hps-analysis</a><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> Hps-analysis mailing list<br>
>>> Hps-analysis@jlab.org<br>
>>> <a href="https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hps-analysis">https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hps-analysis</a><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Hps-analysis mailing list<br>
>> Hps-analysis@jlab.org<br>
>> <a href="https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hps-analysis">https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hps-analysis</a><br>
>><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Hps-analysis mailing list<br>
> Hps-analysis@jlab.org<br>
> <a href="https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hps-analysis">https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hps-analysis</a><br>
><br>
</div>
</span></font>
</body>
</html>