August 2, 2017, Production & Analysis Working Group
Meeting Time and Place
The meeting will be on Wednesday August 2, 2017 at 2:00 pm EDT. For those people at Jefferson Lab, the meeting will be in room F326.
- To join via a Web Browser, go to the page  https://bluejeans.com/115815824.
- To join via Polycom room system go to the IP Address: 18.104.22.168 (bjn.vc) and enter the meeting ID: 115815824.
- 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
- More information on connecting to bluejeans is available.
Reconstruction & Analysis Studies Status
- Data Production
- Analysis Focus
- This Week's Studies
- Any other studies
- 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.
- Monitoring Update --- Thomas Britton
- Processing Update --- Alex Austregesilo
- Calibration Update --- Sean Dobbs
- Simulations Update --- Sean Dobbs
Analysis Focus: Total Cross Sections, Acceptance Corrections
- J/Ψ, φUpdate --- Lubomir
- η, ρ, ω, φ --- Simon
- φ --- Thomas
- ω --- Cristiano
- ω --- Mike
- Any others?
Studies: Beamline & Triggering
- Flux --- Justin
- Beam energy --- Beamline Group
- Dependence of polarization on energy cut --Mike D
- Beam Asymmetries --- Alex Austregesilo
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: Hit Efficiencies (i.e. Is the detector working?) Updates on experiment, simulation, and the comparison between the two.
- CDC Hit Efficiencies --- Naomi Jarvis
- FDC Hit Efficiencies --- Alex Austregesilo
- BCAL Hit Efficiencies --- Elton Smith
- FCAL Hit Efficiencies --- Jon Zarling
- Trigger emulation --- Alex Somov
- Triggering efficiency --- Alex Somov
The week after next: Alignment & Track/Shower Efficiencies (i.e. Is the reconstruction working?) Updates on experiment, simulation, and the comparison between the two.
- Drift chamber alignment --- Mike Staib, Alex Barnes
- Tracking Efficiencies --- Paul Mattione, Cristiano Fanelli
- BCAL Shower Efficiencies --- Elton Smith
- FCAL Shower Efficiencies --- Jon Zarling
The following week: Other Updates on experiment, simulation, and the comparison between the two.
- Track / Hit Matching: BCAL, FCAL, TOF, SC --- Paul Mattione, Simon
- Efficiencies: TOF, SC --- Beni, Mahmoud
- Means & Resolutions (time, energy, dE/dx): Tracking, BCAL, FCAL, SC, TOF
- Uncertainties: PID (BCAL, FCAL, TOF, dE/dx), Kinfit (BCAL, FCAL, tracking)
- Channel/Analysis Studies: Branching ratios, cross sections, SDMEs, beam asymmetries
- Other reconstruction/analysis issues
15 Minute summaries of progress and future plans on the 2017 mcsmear Workplan.
- August 9th
- BCAL - Mark Dalton
- CDC - Naomi Jarvis
- SC - Mahmoud Kamel
- August 17th
- FCAL - Matt Shepherd
- FDC - Lubomir Pentchev / Alex Austregesilo
- TOF - Beni Zhilmann
- Analysis launch started Tuesday, analyzing 60 channels, and should finish in a few days (~500 jobs running at once):
- It's using the new library, which has not been merged into the master because it's not 100% functional yet (e.g. no detached vertices yet). It has been tagged though: analysis-2017_01-ver01-batch01
- It's using a set of built-in cuts that are applied to ALL channels: Analysis Launch Cuts
- Running with 12 threads, it's 4x faster than the old library (30 min vs 2hr) and uses 1/2 the RAM (9 vs 18 GB)
- With tighter cuts than before, the trees are 27% of the size of the REST files (vs. 62% with old cuts), and is expected to take 32 TB of space.
- Lubomir is trying to understand why the background is different for his e+/- analysis between the 2016 and 2017 data. The response from the kinematic fit looks like it may be different for the background, although it's uncertain why this might be. He's still looking into it.
- Mike Dugger showed that the extracted values of the polarization depend heavily on the width of the ΔE matching cut between the tagger and the PS, at least for narrow-width cuts. The same narrow cut yields a different polarization for the different PARA/PERP/45/135/AMO settings. However, everything looks consistent with wide cuts, or by not cutting at all, so that's what he's doing for now.
- Alex Austregesilo showed the extracted P*Sigma from the Spring 2017 data as a function of run # for the different polarization orientations, showing that they are relatively stable and in agreement with each other.