STAR QA Board

[Aswini Kumar Sahoo 1920502 <aswinis19@iiserbpr.ac.in>]

Dear all,

Considering the recent discussions, I have re-assessed the shift log for 3 runs forward and backward to the bad runs found by the algorithm and made a summarized report on it. Please have a look at the attachment. I hope this will help the convenors to decide the final bad run list. Please let me know if anything else is needed from my side.

Thanks and Regards

Aswini

On Sat, Feb 17, 2024 at 1:27 PM Aswini Kumar Sahoo 1920502 <aswinis19@iiserbpr.ac.in> wrote:

Dear Ashik and Emmy,

Thanks for the suggestions. It will be easy to look at some certain runs. We will work on it.

Thanks and Regards

Aswini

On Sat, Feb 17, 2024 at 10:42 AM Zhiwan Xu <zhiwanxu@physics.ucla.edu> wrote:

Dear Ashik and Emmy,

 Thank you both for sharing with us the information. It is very useful. Aswini and I will work together on the run log assessment for 11.5 GeV (run 20).

 I think we would reach out through the mailing list if we encounter any further questions.

Best,

Zhiwan

------------------------------------
Zhiwan Xu,
Department of Physics and Astronomy, UCLA
zhiwanxu@physics.ucla.edu

---

From: "ASHIK IKBAL" <ashikhep@gmail.com>
To: "Emilie Duckworth" <educkwor@kent.edu>
Cc: "Zhiwan Xu" <zhiwanxu@physics.ucla.edu>, "Aswini Kumar Sahoo 1920502" <aswinis19@iiserbpr.ac.in>, "star-qaboard-l" <star-qaboard-l@lists.bnl.gov>
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2024 7:13:39 PM
Subject: Re: EXT: Re: [STAR-QAboard] Weekly QA Board Meeting - 16/Feb/2024 at noon 12 EDT

Hi Zhiwan,

I think Emmy is right. Thanks to Emmy for explaining the procedure to check the shift log.

Tommy and I were discussing how to handle the large no. of runs. I can understand looking at all the 2000 runs in the shift log is very cumbersome for the two of you. Hence, my immediate suggestion is to look at 2-3 runs forward and backward of each bad run found by the algorithm. E.g., suppose run no. 20344004 is a bad run found by the algorithm. Then what you have to do is to look at 2-3 runs before and after 20344004. Similarly do the same corresponding to all the badruns. You don't have to look at all the 2000 runs. 

Please let me know if you have further questions.

Hope this helps!

Thanks,

Ashik

On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 3:37 PM Duckworth, Emilie <educkwor@kent.edu> wrote:

Zhiwan,

That sounds correct, if its marked as bad by shift leader, or there was an unexpected beam dump or such similar disruptive event, then mark it as bad. Otherwise, if its just that a few RDO sectors were masked out, or a detector was not included in the run, that should be fine if there were no QA issues with the run.

Emmy

---

From: Zhiwan Xu <zhiwanxu@physics.ucla.edu>
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2024 12:50 PM
To: ASHIK IKBAL <ashikhep@gmail.com>; Duckworth, Emilie <educkwor@kent.edu>
Cc: Aswini Kumar Sahoo 1920502 <aswinis19@iiserbpr.ac.in>; star-qaboard-l <star-qaboard-l@lists.bnl.gov>
Subject: EXT: Re: [STAR-QAboard] Weekly QA Board Meeting - 16/Feb/2024 at noon 12 EDT

 

Dear Ashik,

 Thank you for the information. As per your suggestion, I have located the previous 9.2 GeV run assessment webpage: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/educkwort/173-gev-QA-and-92-gev-runlog-check, we may be able to work according to it. We also want to understand more about the criteria:

 1)Common errors for beams, like beam aborted unexpectedly, would be considered as a bad run.

 2)Common errors involving detectors are more complicated. For example, if it caused the run to stop (i.e. magnet, Trip, L4), or was marked by the shift log as problematic, we should take it down as a bad run. If some detector (i.e. eTOF, or one RDO of iTPC was masked) is not included in the run but did not affect the data taking, and online QA plots look fine, we would choose NOT to mark them as bad ones.

 If Emmy or Tommy could have more insight into the question, it would be nice to help us understand it.

Best,
Zhiwan

------------------------------------
Zhiwan Xu,
Department of Physics and Astronomy, UCLA
zhiwanxu@physics.ucla.edu

---

From: "ASHIK IKBAL" <ashikhep@gmail.com>
To: "Aswini Kumar Sahoo 1920502" <aswinis19@iiserbpr.ac.in>
Cc: "star-qaboard-l" <star-qaboard-l@lists.bnl.gov>, "Zhiwan Xu" <zhiwanxu@physics.ucla.edu>
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2024 7:17:59 AM
Subject: Re: [STAR-QAboard] Weekly QA Board Meeting - 16/Feb/2024 at noon 12 EDT

Hi Aswini and Zhiwan,

The idea of the runlog assessment is to check if there are any extra bad runs which are not found by the QA algorithm but there are some issues in the shift log, e.g, unexpected beam abort, SL marked bad, etc. You just need to report those runs. As a reference, you can look at the previous studies in the QA board page: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/ashik/QA-Board

I could remember Emmy and Tommy did this extensively for 9.2 GeV. You can always write to them for guidance/suggestions for this study. 

As a side note, if there are 2000 runs in total for 11.5 GeV, and if it is too much for one person, you two can divide them equally and share the load. At the end of the study, you can make a combined presentation at the QA board. 

Please let me know if you have further questions.

Have a nice weekend!

Thanks,

Ashik

On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 10:57 PM Aswini Kumar Sahoo 1920502 <aswinis19@iiserbpr.ac.in> wrote:

Dear Experts,

I and Zhiwan from UCLA had been assigned to finalise the bad run list for the Au+Au 11.5 GeV data set. We have been told to go through the shift log for each run to identify if there is any issue and the run has been skipped by the standard algorithm. There are about ~2000 run numbers in the above data set and going through each shift log would be difficult. Both of us discussed a lot since the last two weeks and we are still confused about what should be the actual criteria for a run to be bad. For example very often one sector of iTPC is missing or the eTOF is not there while taking the data. Currently we do not understand how to proceed in the task. We would be grateful if experts can comment on this matter. Please let me know your suggestions.

Thanks and regards

Aswini

IISER, Berhampur

On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 3:32 AM ASHIK IKBAL via STAR-QAboard-l <star-qaboard-l@lists.bnl.gov> wrote:

Dear All,

We will have our weekly QA board meeting this Friday
(16/Feb/2024) at noon 12 EDT.  Please let me know if you would like to present. 

The agenda can be found here: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/ashik/QA-Board

Zoom connection details:

Join ZoomGov Meeting

https://bnl.zoomgov.com/j/1618907709?pwd=YitQYzFUdWFYU1ppTjYxTjRYbDdsZz09

Meeting ID: 161 890 7709
Passcode: 775538

Thanks,

Ashik

--

Ashik Ikbal

Research Scientist

Kent State University

(stationed at Brookhaven National Laboratory)

Department Of Physics

Kent, OH 44242, USA

Contact no.s: +1 631-504-7647 (USA)

                      +91 8250216234 (India)

Alternate e-mails: asheikh2@kent.edu

                             ashik@rcf.rhic.bnl.gov

                             ashik.ikbal.sheikh@cern.ch

_______________________________________________
STAR-QAboard-l mailing list
STAR-QAboard-l@lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-qaboard-l

--

Ashik Ikbal

Research Scientist

Kent State University

(stationed at Brookhaven National Laboratory)

Department Of Physics

Kent, OH 44242, USA

Contact no.s: +1 631-504-7647 (USA)

                      +91 8250216234 (India)

Alternate e-mails: asheikh2@kent.edu

                             ashik@rcf.rhic.bnl.gov

                             ashik.ikbal.sheikh@cern.ch

CAUTION: EXTERNAL SENDER Do not click any links, open any attachments, or REPLY to the message unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe.

--

Ashik Ikbal

Research Scientist

Kent State University

(stationed at Brookhaven National Laboratory)

Department Of Physics

Kent, OH 44242, USA

Contact no.s: +1 631-504-7647 (USA)

                      +91 8250216234 (India)

Alternate e-mails: asheikh2@kent.edu

                             ashik@rcf.rhic.bnl.gov

                             ashik.ikbal.sheikh@cern.ch

Attachment: 11p5GeV_runlog_assesment_Aswini_20feb2024.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document