Choose timezone
Your profile timezone:
LEP data to EDM4hep meeting
LEP data to EDM4hep meeting
Jingyu's talk
- S4
- Michele & Matteo: what is stored in the vertex field after DELSIM? Is it still the production vertex, or the one in the simulation that incorporates magnetic field propagation, etc? Perhaps this can be checked easily by comparing to the original production vertex in the generator
- S5
- Michele: On the status code for long-lived/heavy-flavored particle, what DELSIM does if there is no table provided, e.g. B_c as mentioned in the slide? Can one easily replace the decay table or lifetime by exchanging the external data input?
- Jingyu, Dietrich: Probably back in the time, B_c was still being searched so there is a chance that it was generators' job to decay those heavy flavored particles. But this needs to be checked.
- S6
- Everyone: what is the "re-decay at the analyzer level"? Why the thrust is different before & after doing this decay?
- Jingyu: will check this.
- S7
- Luka: How did you recalculated the legacy DELPHI b-tagging?
- Sanghyun: DELPHI provides the exact B tagging algorithm (AABTAG, the Fortran code in SKELANA) and we can run the legacy algorithm by ourselves
- Luka, Michele: This was not possible for ALEPH
- S9
- Michele, Matteo, Luka: what makes the neutral hadron purity so good?
- Sanghyun: probably we need to hear from Sitian himself
- What's there in DELSIM's decay table? (e.g. B_c, pi+, K+)
Dietrich's talk
- S12:
- Notes from Dietrich: the single Cherenkov photon level simulation is not really good (as seen in the lower row), especially for the liquid. So one needed an additional smearing step to match the MC's Cherenkov angle resolution to the data's one (basically MC was over-optimistic for the number of Cherenkov photons)
- Matteo: Still the ratio above nPhoton>=4 is not too bad.
- Dietrich: yes because the single-photon reconstruction in a noisy environment was a challeging task
- S13:
- Sanghyun: I saw that this leakage correction disappeared in SKELANA starting from 96. Why?
- Dietrich: because we had this distillation plan starting from 96, which made the refractive index stable across time
- General discussion:
- Sanghyun: The data format itself seemed to evolve for different data-taking period. We may need a discussion at some point how to handle these
- Michele: From analyzers' point of view, we wouldn't want a situation that analzer manually maps the collections according to the era-dependent table
- Sanghyun: there might be a trade-off between converting the original DST format faithfully & providing convenient format to analyzers
AOB
- Sanghyun: we will reach out to OPAL experts soon
There are minutes attached to this event.
Show them.