August 16, 2017, Production & Analysis Working Group

From GlueXWiki
Revision as of 09:10, 23 August 2017 by Sdobbs (Talk | contribs) (Simulation Reports)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Meeting Time and Place

The meeting will be on Wednesday August 16, 2017 at 2:00 pm EDT. For those people at Jefferson Lab, the meeting will be in room F326.

Meeting Connections

  1. To join via a Web Browser, go to the page [1]
  2. To join via Polycom room system go to the IP Address: ( and enter the meeting ID: 115815824.
  3. To join via phone, use one of the following numbers and the Conference ID: 115815824.
    • US or Canada: +1 408 740 7256 or
    • US or Canada: +1 888 240 2560
  4. More information on connecting to bluejeans is available.

Reconstruction & Analysis Studies Status


  1. Announcements
  2. Data Production
  3. Analysis Focus
  4. This Week's Studies
  5. Any other studies
  6. Upcoming Study Schedule

This Week's Topics

  • Talks: Summary/overviews only. Detailed discussions should be held in the appropriate working groups.
  • Talks should be limited to 10 + 5 minutes.

Data Production

  1. Monitoring Update --- Thomas Britton
  2. Processing Update --- Alex Austregesilo
  3. Calibration Update --- Sean Dobbs
  4. Simulations Update --- Sean Dobbs

Simulation Reports

15 Minute summaries of progress and future plans on the 2017 mcsmear Workplan.

  1. August 16
    1. FDC - Lubomir Pentchev / Alex Austregesilo
    2. BCAL Mark Dalton
    3. TOF - Beni Zihlmann
  2. August 23
    1. FCAL - Matt Shepherd
    2. SC - Mahmoud Kamel
    3. TOF - Beni Zihlmann

Analysis Focus: Total Cross Sections, Acceptance Corrections

  1. J/Ψ, φ --- Lubomir
  2. η, ρ, ω, φ --- Simon
  3. φ --- Thomas
  4. ω --- Cristiano
  5. Any others?

Studies: Alignment & Track/Shower Efficiencies

(i.e. Is the detector working?) Updates on experiment, simulation, and the comparison between the two.

  1. CDC dE/dx with beam current --- Naomi
  2. CDC dE/dx hit truncation --- Naomi
  3. Trigger emulation --- Alex Somov
  4. Triggering efficiency --- Alex Somov
  5. Drift chamber alignment --- Mike Staib, Alex Barnes
  6. Tracking Efficiencies --- Paul Mattione, Cristiano Fanelli
  7. BCAL Shower Efficiencies --- Elton Smith
  8. FCAL Shower Efficiencies --- Jon Zarling

Upcoming Study Schedule

  • Updates on experiment, simulation, and the comparison between the two.
  • Summary/overviews only. Detailed discussions should be held in the appropriate working groups.
  • All talks should be limited to 10 + 5 minutes.

Next Week: Other Updates on experiment, simulation, and the comparison between the two.

  1. Track / Hit Matching: BCAL, FCAL, TOF, SC --- Paul Mattione, Simon
  2. Efficiencies: TOF, SC --- Beni, Mahmoud
  3. Means & Resolutions (time, energy, dE/dx): Tracking, BCAL, FCAL, SC, TOF
  4. Uncertainties: PID (BCAL, FCAL, TOF, dE/dx), Kinfit (BCAL, FCAL, tracking)
  5. Channel/Analysis Studies: Branching ratios, cross sections, SDMEs, beam asymmetries
  6. Other reconstruction/analysis issues

The week after next: Beamline & Triggering

  1. Flux --- Justin
  2. Beam energy --- Beamline Group
  3. Polarization (TPOL & lineshape) --- Beamline Group
  4. Beam Asymmetries --- Alex Austregesilo
  5. Trigger emulation --- Alex Somov
  6. Triggering efficiency --- Alex Somov

The following week: Hit Efficiencies & Triggering (i.e. Is the detector working?) Updates on experiment, simulation, and the comparison between the two.

  1. CDC Hit Efficiencies --- Naomi Jarvis
  2. FDC Hit Efficiencies --- Alex Austregesilo
  3. BCAL Hit Efficiencies --- Elton Smith
  4. FCAL Hit Efficiencies --- Jon Zarling


Data Production

  1. Processing Update --- Alex is on vacation, Paul reported that the second phase of the analysis launch, including mostly channels with displaced vertices, has begun and is mostly completed processing.
  2. Calibration Update --- Sean reviewed projected additions for next reconstruction run.
  3. Simulations Update --- Sean reported that the second simulation mini-launch is underway, including updates for the BCAL and new CCDB constants, and is processing well on the OSG
    • Elton: what about simulation of background events? Sean: simulations generated with and without random event mix-ins, for comparison.

Simulation Reports

  • Both Lubomir and Alex A. were out, but Alex sent Paul some slides to go over for the FDC
    • The wire efficiencies have well-understood features, which are generally reproduced by simulation. Note that these hits are not removed from the reconstruction, but there is enough redundancy in the reconstruction that this probably doesn't matter.
    • The comparison of pseudoefficiencies, which use the cathode strips as well, do not agree as well. The next step is focus on improving these
    • Sean: Important to compare efficiency in low versus high rate runs.
    • Looks like rotation implemented differently in data and simulation. Mike S.: U & V planes swapped? Sean: problem should be in mcsmear, will check,
  • Mark D. presented an update on the BCAL, focusing on comparing eta's in simulation and data
    • Looked at gamma p -> p pi+ pi- eta, eta -> gamma gamma
    • Found bug in energy smearing, fixed
    • No huge differences in eta resolution seen, unlike what was reported in J/psi analysis
    • Data and simulation have mass variations in +- 10 MeV. Had noticed other 1-2% effects in other places
    • Sees difference in pi0 widths at higher energy. pi0 mean now also varying in simulation
    • Are there potential photon/electron differences? Richard J.: someone should check description of support material in front of BCAL in geometry
    • Quick look at FCAL suggests smearing too low

Analysis Focus: Total Cross Sections, Acceptance Corrections

  • Simon - Measured t-slope for phi, slightly larger than previous measurements (~3.8 -> ~4.5), constant over energy range
  • Thomas -Aalso measuring t-slope, dealing with software issues and looking at 2017 data

Studies: Alignment & Track/Shower Efficiencies

  • Naomi gave some updates on her dE/dx studies
    • Using hit amplitude instead of integral gives ~30% improvement in proton/pion separation, better stability against higher rates
      • Improvement is due to insensitivity to baseline changes and multiple hits. Eugene: could try using fixed baseline
    • Decreasing truncation from 50% to 20% also gives improvement, larger improvement when integral is used than for amplitude
  • Alex S. gave update on trigger simulations
    • A trigger calculation was first done in standalone code, using a model to convert simulated hits into waveforms and running the simulated trigger algorithms on these signals.
    • Trigger parameters are pulled from RCDB and used as in data
    • This has now been implemented in sim-recon and basically works. Further debugging and tuning is needed.
    • Dmitry has been working on some changes to RCDB to support this. They are almost done, awaiting some support from the CC on SQLite issues. Alex will commit a version of the code by the end of the week.