FWD Software

["Brandenburg, Daniel" <brandenburg.89 AT osu.edu>]

Hi Akio,

I saw your other emails and the J/psi pages (before Drupal decided to go offline)

I am a little confused though because the J/psi study that my undergrad did was with these newer productions and we saw decent results with track matching and charge sign cuts. 

Also the plots I showed with charge mis-id rates, efficiency, etc. were from these. So I may have made a mistake - for instance Barak unfortunately informed me that I forgot to enable the FCS chain in the Run22 production, so I am re-running that now. 

I am about to give FWD talk at collab meeting, but then I will look into the pythia sets and see what might be going on. 

I actually have in the last few days finished incorporating FTT measurements at the strips level (instead of making spaceports from strip intersections as before). But I have not had time to see how well it works with more than 1K events yet.

I will run each one with /without FTT refit and make sub folders so that it is clear. We need this for the continued development anyways, so it is a good idea. 

Daniel Brandenburg

Assistant Professor

College of Arts and Sciences

Department of Physics

Ohio State University

 

From: Akio Ogawa <akio AT bnl.gov>
Date: Thursday, August 14, 2025 at 5:19 PM
To: Brandenburg, Daniel <brandenburg.89 AT osu.edu>
Cc: Borna Maghoul <bmagh001 AT ucr.edu>, star-fwd-software-l AT lists.bnl.gov <star-fwd-software-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Subject: Re: [[Star-fwd-software-l] ] Forward Track Fits Missing FTT points

Hello

Unless we have a short term solution for FTT and you plan to switch with
FTT (for both MC and data) soon-ish, can we have separate Pico DST from
Pythia MC with FTT added after FST seeding?

I don't know what pt (or zvertex) resolution to be expected from FST only
tracking (in MC or ideal case for now). But it seems like we lost it and
don't have any pt resolution nor charge separation.

If we go on without FTT for a while, we need to do something else, like
including ECAL cluster in the track fit or something. Unless there is some
code issue of some sort?

OGAWA, akio                 Email : akio AT bnl.gov
BrookHaven National Lab. Physics Dep. 510A 2-235
Upton, NY, 11973-5000          Tel. 631-344-5293

On Wed, 13 Aug 2025, "Brandenburg, Daniel" wrote:

> Hi Kumar,
>
> Apologies- I didn’t make it clear but until we have a plan for finishing the FTT reconstruction and
> including those points *in real data* I have disabled them in the track fitting. This provides for the
> time being, the most accurate and honest data to simulation comparison. 
>
> Best,
> Daniel 
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
> From: star-fwd-software-l-request AT lists.bnl.gov <star-fwd-software-l-request AT lists.bnl.gov> on behalf of
> Borna Maghoul <star-fwd-software-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2025 11:24:05 PM
> To: star-fwd-software-l AT lists.bnl.gov <star-fwd-software-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> Subject: [[Star-fwd-software-l] ] Forward Track Fits Missing FTT points  
> Hi all, I've been playing around with the most recent commit of the StFwdTrackMaker on some simulated
> muon and pythia datasets and I've noticed that the reconstructed tracks only use the FST and the vertex
> for fits, and that another
> Hi all,
>
> I've been playing around with the most recent commit of the StFwdTrackMaker on some simulated muon and
> pythia datasets and I've noticed that the reconstructed tracks only use the FST and the vertex for fits,
> and that another fit using FTT hits aren't done. Based off of the debug, the FTT hits are being loaded
> in, as seen below:
> image.png
> I'm using the FST seeding. After the seed fitting with the FST points, no further fits are done, so the
> total number of fit points for the track is at most 4. Does anyone know why this is occurring? It seems
> that last month the tracker didn't seem to have this issue.
>
> Regards,
> Kumar
>
>