Star-tpc-l mailing list

[videbaek <videbaek AT bnl.gov>]

Gene,
thanks for the forward. I will attend tomorrow 11.30 meeting.
I am a bit baffled we apperently had a chance in track effency since 
2014 that has not been observed?

best Flemming


On 2024-09-17 18:51, Van Buren, Gene wrote:
> Frank asked me to forward my response to the TPC group.
> -Gene
>
> > Begin forwarded message:
> > From: "Van Buren, Gene" <gene AT bnl.gov>
> >
> > Subject: Re: [[Star-scmgt-l] ] new TPC alignment: comparison of dev
> > and SL24y // Fwd: [star-bnl/star-sw] 💥DO NOT MERGE💥 ❗ add
> > new TPC alignment, hit errors and slewing corrections for 2024 (PR
> > #702)
> >
> > Date: September 17, 2024 at 2:47:39 PM EDT
> >
> > Hi, all
> >
> > I appreciate that Yuri performed this comparison and summarized
> > it...
> >
> > Yuri's summary highlights changes in tracking ("hit sharing"). I
> > believe that to be an important topic, worthy of further
> > understanding (and I'm certain some time was spent on this in 2016
> > when StiCA was integrated, and that history should be understood).
> > It is unclear to me why it is a component in this PR for TPC
> > alignment.
> >
> > As that dominates the track-by-track comparison, we're left with the
> > TPC hit-by-hit comparison. I guess we take Yuri's word on not being
> > concerned about the prompt TPC hits. And I might interpret the
> > differences in the drifting TPC hits to mean that the same alignment
> > is applied for this old data, but with different math in the code
> > (??), and that the RMS of ~0.00016 cm in x & y represents an
> > uncertainty due to rounding differences in the different math
> > (though I guess those math calculations don't apply in z as there is
> > no difference in z at all for the drifting hits).
> >
> > Regarding the new alignment's chain option "CorrZ" (to be applied to
> > iTPC era data), my understanding is that the TPC group may not yet
> > have seen justification for Yuri's choice of TPC distortion
> > corrections, but I welcome being corrected on that point.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Gene
> >
> > On Sep 17, 2024, at 1:31 PM, Frank Geurts <geurts AT rice.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > From: Yuri Fisyak <notifications AT github.com>
> > Subject: Re: [star-bnl/star-sw] 💥DO NOT MERGE💥 ❗ add new TPC
> > alignment, hit errors and slewing corrections for 2024 (PR #702)
> > Date: September 17, 2024 at 11:11:47 AM CDT
> > To: star-bnl/star-sw <star-sw AT noreply.github.com>
> > Cc: Frank Geurts <geurts AT rice.edu>, Mention
> > <mention AT noreply.github.com>
> > Reply-To: star-bnl/star-sw
> > <reply+AEMNVR6WCIQT56DWSN3VFBWE6WFUHEVBNHHJEYYC7A AT reply.github.com>
> >
> > I have posted comparison of dev and SL24y productions to answer the
> > question on the effect of code modification on production of old
> > (before iTPC) data with old chains.
> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/blog/fisyak/Track-track-and-hit-hit-analyses-dev-and-SL24y-Alignment2024-AuAu2002016-sample
> > I don't see any show stoppers to start the calibration production
> > with SL24l for all fixed target samples from 2019-2021 with new
> > alignment (CorrZ).
> >
> > —
> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
> > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.

--
Flemming Videbaek
senior scientist, emeritus
videbaek @ bnl.gov
Brookhaven National Lab
Physics Department
Bldg 510D
Upton, NY 11973

phone: 631-344-4106
cell     :  631-681-1596