 |
 |
Hey Matt, 393 of 697 events failed one or more of the cuts. I'm going back to log more information. I expected the number of clusters to go up a bit because of the changes to the thresholds, but I was surprised to see some events lose clusters. Norman -----Original Message----- From: Graham, Mathew Thomas Sent: Monday, June 08, 2015 9:48 AM To: Graf, Norman A. Cc: hps-software Subject: Re: pass1 variability How many events are we talking about here? > On Jun 8, 2015, at 9:43 AM, Graf, Norman A. <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Hello All, > I had skimmed a number of what I considered to be "golden" events off the pass0 stream and had written an integration test to monitor the reconstruction. Each event was required to have two ReconstructedParticles (one electron, one positron), with clusters matched to the tracks and each track required to have six hits. No other clusters or tracks were allowed in the event. I assumed that with the relatively minor modifications going into the pass1 release that I would be able to assert the same conditions on the pass1 output. I was quite surprised by how many events changed, gaining or losing tracks and clusters. > I'm wondering if anyone else has done an event-by-event comparison and whether these differences are expected behavior. > The test file I am using is available at: > http://www.lcsim.org/test/hps-java/run5772_golden.evio > > Thanks, > Norman > > ######################################################################## > 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 ######################################################################## 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