ldmx-sw icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
ldmx-sw copied to clipboard

barID in trigScintDigi set to 1023

Open awhitbeck opened this issue 5 years ago • 9 comments

For the upstream and downstream arrays there seems to be a problem with barID:

image

These numbers should never be larger than 50. I am including the configuration file that I used to generate these vents. I see this in a few dozen events out of 10k.

from LDMX.Framework import ldmxcfg
from LDMX.Detectors.makePath import makeDetectorPath
from LDMX.SimApplication import generators
from LDMX.SimApplication import examples

p=ldmxcfg.Process("sim")

p.libraries.append("libSimApplication.so")
p.libraries.append("libBiasing.so")
p.libraries.append("libEventProc.so")

mySim = ldmxcfg.Producer( 'mySim' , 'ldmx::Simulator' )
mySim.parameters[ "detector" ] = makeDetectorPath( "ldmx-det-v12" )

mpgGen = generators.multi( "mgpGen" ) # this is the line that actually creates the generator
mpgGen.parameters[ "vertex" ] = [ -27.926, 0., -700 ] # mm
mpgGen.parameters[ "nParticles" ] = 1
mpgGen.parameters[ "pdgID" ] = 11
mpgGen.parameters[ "enablePoisson" ] = True
mpgGen.parameters[ "momentum" ] = [ 380., 0., 3981.909 ] #MeV

mySim.parameters['generators'] = [ mpgGen ]

mySim.parameters["beamSpotSmear"] = [20., 80., 0.]
mySim.parameters[ "runNumber" ] = 9001
mySim.parameters[ "verboseLevel" ] = 10

p.sequence=[mySim]

from LDMX.EventProc.trigScintDigis import *
trigScintDigis.parameters["pe_per_mip"]=100.
trigScintDigisDn.parameters["pe_per_mip"]=100.
trigScintDigisTag.parameters["pe_per_mip"]=100.

p.sequence.extend([trigScintDigis,
                   trigScintDigisDn,
                   trigScintDigisTag])

from LDMX.EventProc.trackerHitKiller import trackerHitKiller
findableTrack = ldmxcfg.Producer("findable", "ldmx::FindableTrackProcessor")
p.sequence.extend([trackerHitKiller,findableTrack])

p.outputFiles=['test.root']

p.maxEvents = 10000
p.logFrequency = 1000

awhitbeck avatar Jun 26 '20 12:06 awhitbeck

1023 = 2^10 - 1, so I'm guessing there is an overflow somewhere inside of TrigScintID when doing some bit-shifting nonsense

tomeichlersmith avatar Jun 26 '20 17:06 tomeichlersmith

yeah this to me looks like initializing to -1 and then never setting it properly

bryngemark avatar Jun 26 '20 19:06 bryngemark

Did anything change since we tested this last? I checked the ID's for upstream and downstream before and they were correct. It's odd that it's showing up now.

On Fri, Jun 26, 2020, 12:18 PM bryngemark [email protected] wrote:

yeah this to me looks like initializing to -1 and then never setting it properly

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/LDMX-Software/ldmx-sw/issues/826#issuecomment-650352614, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA4JMXHHB7D53C4VYKK7IDLRYTX75ANCNFSM4OJI574A .

omar-moreno avatar Jun 26 '20 19:06 omar-moreno

if it's true that this doesn't happen in the tagger module but in upstream and downstream modules, i'd check specifically that the module ID gets set properly.

bryngemark avatar Jun 26 '20 19:06 bryngemark

I think this only happens when no particle passes through the array, but that is only based on a few anecdotal observations. There shouldn't be any cases where no particle passes through the tagger array.

awhitbeck avatar Jun 26 '20 19:06 awhitbeck

On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 12:28 PM Andrew Whitbeck [email protected] wrote:

I think this only happens when no particle passes through the array, but that is only based on a few anecdotal observations. There shouldn't be any cases where no particle passes through the tagger array.

OK, if that's the case, this makes more sense.

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/LDMX-Software/ldmx-sw/issues/826#issuecomment-650357160, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA4JMXCVT6XAXYXYU3DUEALRYTZE5ANCNFSM4OJI574A .

omar-moreno avatar Jun 26 '20 19:06 omar-moreno

Right... so these are all noise hits in that case? The barID setting for noise hits assumes that the module number has been set. I see that this happens inside the real simhit loop. So that should probably be changed to accommodate the case when a module only has noise hits.

bryngemark avatar Jun 26 '20 23:06 bryngemark

Can this issue be closed?

jmmans avatar Nov 05 '20 20:11 jmmans

No fix for this has been pushed yet. I did think about it yesterday but I think only ugly (collection name parsing) solutions can be implemented until we move to processing all three modules in one single collection.

So, I'd say, can't be closed.

bryngemark avatar Nov 05 '20 20:11 bryngemark