star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: STAR HardProbes PWG
List archive
Re: [Star-hp-l] pp510_2017 trigger efficiency sim options
- From: "Ma, Rongrong" <marr AT bnl.gov>
- To: Leszek Kosarzewski <leszek.kosarzewski AT gmail.com>
- Cc: Rosi Reed <rosijreed AT lehigh.edu>, Yi Yang <yiyang0429 AT gmail.com>, STAR HardProbes PWG <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov>, "Kauder, Kolja" <kkauder AT bnl.gov>
- Subject: Re: [Star-hp-l] pp510_2017 trigger efficiency sim options
- Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2023 02:36:02 +0000
Hello Leszek
The update of the DbV is a standard practice for data production, including both RawData->MuDst and MuDst->PicoDst. In the case of Run17 pp 510 GeV st_physics stream, I think you need to use DbV20220719 since it picks up the latest BEMC calibration.
In this case, there are indeed differences in the BEMC information between MuDst and PicoDst.
Thinking more on this, I think one should always use the DbV for the data one analyzes. If you analyze PicoDst, you should use the DbV producing PicoDst. Tracking information is unchanged between MuDst and PicoDst, but other information (BEMC,
BTof, MTD, etc) could change. Gald that we discussed this :)
Best
Rongrong
On Jan 27, 2023, at 7:37 PM, Leszek Kosarzewski <leszek.kosarzewski AT gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Rongrong
Thank you for explanation. I'm still a bit confused. What I meant is that when I look at the original MuDst and picoDst production options for real data I see that they differ. As you said picoDst production is just a copy, so why the updated database between the MuDst and picoDst? Does the updated database have any impact on the picoDst production only? Which database to use for embedding?
For embedding we plan to look at StEvent+StMcEvent or any other combination that includes both reco and MC data, this is clear.
Best regards, Leszek
pt., 27 sty 2023 o 16:30 Ma, Rongrong <marr AT bnl.gov> napisał(a):
Hello Leszek
For the study of trigger and vertex finding efficiencies, you need realistic simulations, i.e. embedding into zero-bias events, since pileup plays a role.
I do not think the change of DbV in MuDst->PicoDst compared to RawData->MuDst is critical since most of the time the PicoDst production is just a copy of the information in MuDst. If you want to use PicoDst, you should verify all the information, including MC truth, is available in PicoDst. If not, you will need to stick with MuDst.
Hope this helps.
BestRongrong
On Jan 27, 2023, at 8:11 AM, Leszek Kosarzewski <leszek.kosarzewski AT gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Brennan and All
I unfortunately missed the discussion during the meeting, because I had another urgent meeting. The options seem ok to me, just keep in mind to also change DbV20160418 to DbV20220719 I think and perhaps pp2015c to pp2017a.
Here, I have a question. Is the RawData->MuDst production separate to picoDst production? If so, then I guess we should look at options for the original reconstruction (RawData->MuDst). Though, I see that in some cases the database version changes between RawData->MuDst (DbV20200225) and MuDst->picoDst (DbV20220719). Then I think, when we analyze picoDsts, we should take the database version option from picoDst production. In principle other chain options may differ too, so we need a combination of the 2.
I discussed with Brennan how to do a standalone Pythia8 simulation and reconstruction as well as Pythia8+zerobias embedding. So here we need to make a decision which one to choose. If we want a realistic simulation, then we need embedding with zerobias data.
Best regards, Leszek
czw., 26 sty 2023 o 15:58 Yi Yang via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> napisał(a):
Hi Brennan,
I checked with Te-Chuan who actually ran all the jobs and the chain options Rongrong provided should be good except you need to change ry2015c to ry2017a.
Cheers,Yi
_______________________________________________On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 12:58 AM Ma, Rongrong via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
Hello Brennan_______________________________________________
For simulation, there are also extra chain options one need to use. Here are the chain options I used for 200 GeV p+p analysis in 2015 for producing and reconstructing PYTHIA events embedded into zero-bias events:- To produce DaqFile: in, magF, tpcDb, NoDefault, TpxRaw, -ittf, NoOutput
- To produce FzdFile: fzin, gen ̇T, geomT, sim ̇T, TpcRS, -ittf, NoDefault, sdtYYM- MDD.HHMMSS, ry2015c
- Reconstruction: DbV20160418, pp2015c, btof, mtd, mtdCalib, pp2pp, fmsDat, fmsPoint, fpsDat, BEmcChkStat, CorrX, OSpaceZ2, OGridLeak3D, -hitfilt, Tpx- Clu, bbcSim, pxlFastSim, istFastSim, btofSim, emcY2, emcSim, EEfs, mtdsim, TpcMixer, GeantOut, MiniMcMk, McAna, IdTruth, -in, NoInput, useInTracker
Some of them might not be relevant for your analysis, e.g. HFT related options. I think Yi's group has done such simulation for Run17 dimuon analysis, so maybe they can provide some guidance.
BestRongrong
On Jan 25, 2023, at 11:35 AM, Kolja Kauder via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
I can tell you that that's indeed what we used for the pico conversion, pasted here for precisenessDbV20220719,y2017a,picoDst,PicoVtxMode:PicoVtxDefault,PicoCovMtxMode:PicoCovMtxWrite,btofMatch,btofCalib::pppAMode,vpdCalib::pppAMode
On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 11:18 AM Rosi Reed <rosijreed AT lehigh.edu> wrote:
Hi Brennan,Can you please write out the options in your email rather than positing a screenshot? This way the interested parties can use it for a copy and search if they need to do that in order to answer your question.Thank you,Rosi
On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 10:33 AM Brennan Schaefer via Star-hp-l <star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
Greetings HP members (cc Kolja),_______________________________________________
I'm working on running simulations to study trigger efficiencies with the pp500_2017 dataset (for my J/Psi production vs multiplicity measurement). Will the options in the attached screenshot work?
best,
b
--
Brennan SchaeferPostdoctoral Research AssociatePhysics DepartmentLehigh UniversityBethlehem, PA 18015, USA402 Lewis Laboratorytel: 610.758.5328
Star-hp-l mailing list
Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l
--
Rosi Reed
RHIC/AGS UEC member
Associate Professor, Physics Department
Lehigh University
(610)758-3907
16 Memorial Drive East Office 406
Bethlehem, PA 18015
she/her/hers
--
_______________________________________________________________________
Kolja Kauder, Ph.D.
NPPS, EIC
Brookhaven National Lab, Upton, NY
+1 (631) 344-5935he/him/his
________________________
Star-hp-l mailing list
Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l
Star-hp-l mailing list
Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l
Star-hp-l mailing list
Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l
-
[Star-hp-l] pp510_2017 trigger efficiency sim options,
Brennan Schaefer, 01/25/2023
-
Re: [Star-hp-l] pp510_2017 trigger efficiency sim options,
Rosi Reed, 01/25/2023
-
Re: [Star-hp-l] pp510_2017 trigger efficiency sim options,
Kolja Kauder, 01/25/2023
-
Re: [Star-hp-l] pp510_2017 trigger efficiency sim options,
Ma, Rongrong, 01/25/2023
- Re: [Star-hp-l] pp510_2017 trigger efficiency sim options, Brennan Schaefer, 01/25/2023
-
Re: [Star-hp-l] pp510_2017 trigger efficiency sim options,
Yi Yang, 01/26/2023
-
Re: [Star-hp-l] pp510_2017 trigger efficiency sim options,
Leszek Kosarzewski, 01/27/2023
-
Re: [Star-hp-l] pp510_2017 trigger efficiency sim options,
Ma, Rongrong, 01/27/2023
- Re: [Star-hp-l] pp510_2017 trigger efficiency sim options, Leszek Kosarzewski, 01/27/2023
- Re: [Star-hp-l] pp510_2017 trigger efficiency sim options, Ma, Rongrong, 01/27/2023
-
Re: [Star-hp-l] pp510_2017 trigger efficiency sim options,
Ma, Rongrong, 01/27/2023
-
Re: [Star-hp-l] pp510_2017 trigger efficiency sim options,
Leszek Kosarzewski, 01/27/2023
-
Re: [Star-hp-l] pp510_2017 trigger efficiency sim options,
Ma, Rongrong, 01/25/2023
-
Re: [Star-hp-l] pp510_2017 trigger efficiency sim options,
Kolja Kauder, 01/25/2023
-
Re: [Star-hp-l] pp510_2017 trigger efficiency sim options,
Rosi Reed, 01/25/2023
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.