Re: [Brahms-dev-l] dst update ?

Hi I will like since we are preparing the offgicial scripts, and repository
for the run-4 data to come back to the
issue raised by claus a long way back

- The specifics are essentially un-answered.
What has been done is
i) added CC,INL counters for pp running
ii) added RHIC clock (bunch number information)

I will ask steve+erik+hiro to come up with some appropriate set of variables
that can be extracted from the
flow modules, and that should go into the bdst's.

I have some concerns on the track re-fit module, on recent tests it gives
lots of errors 'should not happen' and will
iscuss with Kris.

I agree we need the 'closets points' as pointed out by Claus.Someone may
have looked at this but so far I can tell it has not been made public.


I think we can very soon do the official reco for the 200 GeV auau (ltr and
gtr) now that Pawel and Tomasz has made most of the calibrations for the DC
and completed  the 'automated way of generating the offsets for missing
matchings
(one issue here comes to mind namely that the fitted dang offsets DO depend
on polarity, in FS this is not a problem, but in
mrs we should really have independent offsets for POS and NEG settings.

We should make sure that there is enough information to possible re-evaluate
theta,phi based on actual vertex
chosen and cuts made there (recall the theta-vertex diff dependence).

SInce this is turning out to be an e-mail with several open issues regarding
tracking and dst I will like to add that someone
really should investigate the issue on TPC tracks close to the edge, by
looking at e.g. T3 projected tracks back to T2 (T1)
and determine an emperical correction at the hit-level (not the track-level)
in an attempt to get rid of the 'apperent epeneces on
position, and I believe resiual effects on acceptances at the smallest
angles for any gicen setting.


regards

flemming

>
> Hi,
>
> Before we start the serious reconstruction of this run, why don't we
> update the dsts so that we have entries for measurements we know will come
> soon - this way we'll not end up in the unfortunate situation where we
> have different dst versions for the same run.
>
> - What entries do we need for the reaction plane measurements?
>
> - Do we want to have a new cent measurement using ZDC vs mult?
>
> - I'd like to have the closest distance to the different magnets
>   (in x and y) for each track.
>
> - Anything else?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Claus
>
> _______________________________________________
> Brahms-dev-l mailing list
> Brahms-dev-l@lists.bnl.gov
> http://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/brahms-dev-l
>


_______________________________________________
Brahms-dev-l mailing list
Brahms-dev-l@lists.bnl.gov
http://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/brahms-dev-l