sPHENIX MAPS tracker discussion

[Hao-Ren Jheng <hrjheng AT mit.edu>]

Hi Devon,

I think integrating the raw hit QA into the cluster QA check is a good idea. The macro I was using is located in my working directory: /sphenix/user/hjheng/sPHENIXRepo/MVTX/runcheck/runsummary.C

It needs some improvements and adjustments for flexibility, which I haven’t had the chance to implement yet. Would you take a look and see if it’s straightforward to add the raw hit checks directly, or alternatively it might be easier to start fresh with a new macro or module for the same purpose?

We could discuss this further over Zoom after the new-year break if it’s helpful.

Best,

Hao-Ren

On Dec 18, 2024, at 14:10, Devon Loomis <dloom AT umich.edu> wrote:

Hi Hao-Ren,

Thanks for reaching out with information about the MVTX QA. I think it makes a lot of sense to combine your cluster and chip occupancy QA with the raw hit QA. Since you have a very nice workflow and html set up, perhaps it would be best if we incorporate the raw hit QA in that? As of now, I am just grabbing the raw hit data from the QAhtml output.

Thanks,

Devon

On Dec 18, 2024, at 12:47 PM, Hao-Ren Jheng <hrjheng AT mit.edu> wrote:

Hi Devon,

Thank you for looking into the MVTX QA! 

Over the summer, I set up a semi-automatic MVTX run quality check that analyzes cluster QAs from fast production and publishes a daily updated list on this webpage:: https://sphenix-intra.sdcc.bnl.gov/WWW/user/hjheng/Run2024/MvtxQA-Summary/. Sorry for not coordinating with you earlier — I’ve been occupied with other tasks and didn’t get a chance to share this in the tracking meeting.

The criteria I set to classify runs as good/OK/bad is primarily based on the fit quality to the cluster phi distribution and the probability of a high chip occupancy, which are different from yours. I think combining our criteria we could have a comprehensive and complete set of good runs that are useful for tracking-related analyses.

Let me know what you think and how I could help!

Best,

Hao-Ren