bryngemark
bryngemark
@tvami i think these are good suggestions, and if we find a general principle, it will be easier for streamlining input and output collection variable names etc too.
it has not been solved but thanks for reminding me of this issue! pulling in Elizabeth and @rodwyer100 here for reference
Sorry, I was wrong. Module numbers are 1,2,3. Then taking 0 to mean uninitialized is fine. Or, we take this opportunity to change this to start counting at 0 as...
@EBerzin just to couble check you're not running into some version of this...
The priority on this potentially increased now that there will very soon be an automatic validation procedure for PRs, involving running the DQM plots and comparing them to a set...
i can provide the information that ever since some backwards compatibility breaking changes a few years ago, we are not able to run on `v9` without some real work on...
ergonomically speaking, how about separating the "beam" use case (beam spot smear enabled by default) from the "gun" use case (no smearing)? i suppose for alignment studies and the like,...
> Actually I have a question about the numbers, I've been seeing these for 4 GeV and for 8 GeV too, would we expect these to be different for 8...
+1 on this and in particular, MIP tracking should be pulled out and not run as part of every event (it's a relatively time consuming algorithm and is intended to...
as a side note, how is it that the BDT requires MIP tracking nowadays? when it was developed, MIP tracking rejected the last 10 events that the BDT didn't already...