Linear Collider Forum

Home » Software Tools » LCIO » Meeting Minutes
Minutes of Meeting 2004-09-14 [message #139 is a reply to message #30] Thu, 23 September 2004 08:45 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Messages: 80
Registered: January 2004
Agenda LCIO Meeting 09/14/2004

1) Status
a) f77
b) java
c) cpp

2) Stdhep2LCIO interface

3) Link between Hits and raw Hits
a) TrackerHit->TPCHit: need 1 to many relation, cannot
use LcRelation, because of different types (VTXHit,SITHit,...)
b) CalorimeterHit->RawHit - need only 1 to 1 relation, could in
principle use LCRelation - but should be consistent
with TrackerHit

4) ReconstructedParticle
TB,FG would like to have collection parameter flag
"isUnique" telling the user that the collection at hand
doesn't have double counting (and is complete)
or "isBaseList"

5) Release schedule
FG, TJ: before CHEP if possible

6) AOB



HV has added relations and generic user objects to the f77
implementation, parameters are not yet implemented.
FG points out that the bug tracking forum (with assignments)
is available at
and should be kept up-to-date.
HV expects to be done coding by the end of the week, hopes to have
documentation finished by end of next week.
NG asks if intention is to have output of Brahms reconstruction available
in lcio.
HV yes. currently waiting on resolution of event model and specifics of
some of the objects. e.g. reconstructed particle currently has (x,y,z)
and covariance matrix, but these aren't gaussian distributed, so questions
validity. will need to check on this and decide whether this is what we
want. will not happen before CHEP.

TJ went through list of missing Java stuff in the bug reports and put in
essentially everything except relations.
FG checked out cvs head snapshot, run C++ sim and reco jobs, write out
results, try to read using Java version. This failed since relations
are not yet implemented.

TJ points out that trackerhit positions are doubles, but cov. matrix is float.
Is this OK? (probably)

TJ getgoodnessPID is in ParticleID; should this be in ReconstructedParticle?

TJ algorithm in PID is currently a String. should this be an integer which
points to a string listed in the event header (yes)
change String getIdentifier into int getAlgorithmID

FG believes C++ version is currently up-to-date with all features.
except leave long method names in getters of LCCollection.
except linking raw and generic hits.

Next release will be 1.3. Aim to support 1.0, but not 1.1 and 1.2
for backwards compatibility. plan is to finsh basics this week, and
to discuss advanced topics/usage/utils next week at DESY when TJ visits.

FG urges all to look at updated manual and provide feedback.

RC has started on this, not done yet.
package should go into utils.
discussion of whether stdhep lite classes from Willy Langeveld
should simply be copied or externally referenced. All agreed that
having these classes in multiple locations (lelaps, Mokka, LCIO)
was not clean, but will proceed this way anyway.
need to add float time to MCParticle to allow simulators such as
G4 to properly handle decays.
will aim to finish package by end of next week.

FG points out that the use of LCRelations for TrackerHIts probably will
not work since it will have to point back to different types of hits,
e.g. TPCHits, VXDHits, etc. and we do not want to use LCRelations for
mixed types. We also imagine that TrackerHits may point to many raw data
hits, e.g. a TrackerHit built of many waveforms (TPCHits)

proposal is that CalHit.getRawHit() returns a single LCObject
TrackerHit.getRawHits() returns a vector of LCObjects.

There is currently no way to restrict how users construct collections
of ReconstructedParticles. It could be that various algorithms create
custom collections representing the output of their reconstruction. The
end user will then not know what constitutes either a complete or unique
set of ReconstructedParticles which characterizes the event. The proposal
is to implement two flags. Although there was no strong objection to this
it was felt that it warranted further discussion at DESY next week and
perhaps also on the forum.

5) we are still aiming to release by CHEP.
Read Message
Read Message icon2.gif
Read Message feedback.gif
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic:segfaulting PIDHandler in python
Goto Forum:

Current Time: Thu Feb 20 22:15:33 Pacific Standard Time 2020
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.1.
Copyright ©2001-2010 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software