 |
 |
I just now used the latest jar from nexus, and now it complains about "svt_channels" when trying to "add" a table for "ecal_gains". This is using the same command as yesterday. -Nathan On Dec 11, 2014, at 1:28 PM, "McCormick, Jeremy I." <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Hi, Nathan. > > I know we discussed before that the currently used calibrations (pedestal + noise) in the JLAB database are wrong for about half the crystals due to some kind of mix up with the channel ID convention that was used. I think we should fix this ASAP so that the calibrations are reasonable. The existing conditions collection should just be deleted, too, as it isn’t usable. > > I have an LCSim Driver that generates a pedestal + noise conditions set from data. It is relatively simple right now and just uses the mean and sigma distribution of all ADC values from a histogram. But it could be made more sophisticated by, for instance, selecting only ADC values from background “hits". Could we start working from this Driver to generate these calibrations? If we need to improve it then we should do it. It is already in SVN. (mentioned in my talk today) > > Also, are the pedestals sufficiently stable that we could use one calibration for all the runs thus far? I have calibrated just a few runs with this Driver, and I don’t have much idea if there is any pedestal drift (none that I have seen), or at least enough for us to want to store this information by individual run. I know you stated that there is no significant amount of pedestal drift. Has this been shown definitively in any analysis/plots e.g. for the cosmic runs? > > I currently have all data files for runs 2823, 2825 and 2826 copied to SLAC where I can do analysis on them. Do you want me to generate the pedestal calibrations for these runs and send them to you as text files so you can verify and then load yourself OR I just can directly load them into the JLAB database myself if you’re too busy with ECAL operations. Probably if I did this I would just assign the collections to the individual run numbers and not a range. > > Anyways, let me know what you think is best... > > —Jeremy ######################################################################## Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list To unsubscribe from the HPS-SOFTWARE list, click the following link: https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=HPS-SOFTWARE&A=1