Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

add a steering file for overlaying MC signal with pulser data #922

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 15, 2022

Conversation

tongtongcao
Copy link
Contributor

A steering file for overlay MC signal with pulser data was developed.
Additionally, readout steering file with signal-pulserData as input was slight changed.

Copy link
Collaborator

@cbravo135 cbravo135 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We should discuss what exactly we would like to see as validation for this. I am interested in seeing a comparison of our beam background MC and random triggers. Does this really only use pulser events from data or does it also use the faraday cup sourced random triggers? We should be able to use both, maybe do a quick comparison of the two to be sure they both appear to have zero bias. We might also want to look at some physics selections with beam background and compare to this, and see how close things look. This all being said, I am approving this because it is just adding some new steering files and not changing the production steering files.

@tongtongcao
Copy link
Contributor Author

We should discuss what exactly we would like to see as validation for this. I am interested in seeing a comparison of our beam background MC and random triggers. Does this really only use pulser events from data or does it also use the faraday cup sourced random triggers? We should be able to use both, maybe do a quick comparison of the two to be sure they both appear to have zero bias. We might also want to look at some physics selections with beam background and compare to this, and see how close things look. This all being said, I am approving this because it is just adding some new steering files and not changing the production steering files.

We should discuss what exactly we would like to see as validation for this. I am interested in seeing a comparison of our beam background MC and random triggers. Does this really only use pulser events from data or does it also use the faraday cup sourced random triggers? We should be able to use both, maybe do a quick comparison of the two to be sure they both appear to have zero bias. We might also want to look at some physics selections with beam background and compare to this, and see how close things look. This all being said, I am approving this because it is just adding some new steering files and not changing the production steering files.

Quickly answer the questions:
We did preliminary study to compare signal + pulser data to signal + MC beam, which were reported in several meetings. With loose kinematic cuts, they are basically consistent. One thing we are not clear is that MC beam has much higher FEE peak than pulser data.
For software itself, it does not care what random data as input. It is our choice to use what random data.
For the test study, random data with DAQ hps_v11_5_random_15kHz.cnf is applied.

@JeremyMcCormick
Copy link
Member

Noted Tongtong's answers to Cam's questions. This looks like steering files only and safe to merge.

Copy link
Member

@JeremyMcCormick JeremyMcCormick left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Steering file only - looks safe.

@JeremyMcCormick JeremyMcCormick merged commit eede2a5 into master Nov 15, 2022
This pull request was closed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants