SoLID Ecal Weekly 20230608

Update from Tuesday Analysis/Sim Meeting

• Mike on tracking:
  • looks like back/forward tracking can be added to level0 tree but then it needs to be passed onto level 1

• Spencer update on TS3 study, suggestion:
  • for data: use individual shower calibrated by MIP, not showersum directly
  • for data, run 4680 had SC-A.and.SC-D and SC-A did not work well, should try the newer run
  • for sim, separate the 4 particle types and weigh each by the cross section.

• Darren/Zhiwen is working with Kishan on AI/ML
  • how does AI/ML PID compare with classical PID for beam test sim?
  • how well does the trained ML PID work for beam test data?
• high-level question to be answered by our study:
  • is AI/ML PID complimentary to classical method (thus assist classical method), or superior?

• Update on prescale in data:
  • (Jixie, W. Gu): CODA3.0 uses power(2,n-1)+1, so n=6 means 33 and for every 33 events, 1 is recorded.

Discussion on Cooking with Updated Tracking

• Presentation by Mike:

Discussion on Cooking with Edge-Finding

• Ye presented the principle of edge-finding, presentation:
• Carter is working on setting up his code on ifarm.

update on simulation (Ye)

• with the PS understood, we now have very good agreement in ECal ShowerSum spectrum between different runs (different PS, trigger setup, and threshold). All should be within 15% of the simulation
• the end point of electron sim has a sharp drop off but the data show slower drop off. Not sure what is causing the difference, anything missing in the simulation? Run 4780, how much is pileup?

update from Darren + Spencer

anything else (all)