| Agenda |
Detector Simulation Meeting Apr 01, 1999 at 4:00pm B0 pump room Agenda 1. news and announcements 2. status of the detector simulation executable (Pasha) 3. TOF simulation - first code in the repository (Tianjie) 4. towards May's release: validation of MC (everybody) 5. other issues T.V. link is available:
| Minutes as remembered by Pasha - please let me know about any corrections to be made. |
1. news and announcements
- setting up conditional breakpoints
- attaching commands to breakpoints
- calling object member functions
- >setenv TVROOT ~wike/totalview.3.8.1-1/irix6-mips
- >setenv PATH ${PATH}:${TVROOT}/bin
- >setenv MANPATH ${MANPATH}:${TVROOT}/man
- >totalview your-program
- >addpkg -h RootMods
- >make RootMods.evd
several technical aspects have been discussed:
performance: the last number is 338 sec/100 minimum bias events (MBR) , this is consistent with all the last tiiming measurements (about 12-13 seconds per ttbar event) and means that somewhere there is a slowdown factor of about 1.5-2 we lgot since last spring profiling: e5 has been run with the following TCL file How to run profiller: >ssrun -v -usertime bin/IRIX6-KCC_3_3/e5.exe gnt_e5/test1.tcl >prof -gprof -h -l -quit 1% e5.exe.usertime.18490 > e5.time looking at the timing block diagram
![]()
one can make several observationsItems to be put on the job list:simulation code is spending more than 80% of all the time in GEANT transport routines (including GUSTEP) about 30% of overall time goees to tracing the electrons - where these are coming from? CDF digitization takes a little bit more than 10% of overall time, so digitization routines do not affect the performance who calls GTNINO? how different subdetectors contribute to overall timing ? how the overall time breaks down for different input data, say ttbar events?
2. TOF simulation (Tianjie)
- minutes submitted by Pashaphysics validation of the MC is practically missing. The proposed solution is to create a specialised histogramming module (prototype - RootMods/TGeant3Module.cc) which would do histogramming for the MC. No histogramming should be done inside the simulation code unless it is really necessary . we have working reconstruction code for tracking, calorimetry and IMU. Need to explore it for validation purposes Pasha volunteered to write a base class module which would be oriented on using ROOT histogramming tools and which functionality should include
- opening/closing ROOT files
- creating a directory per subdetector to store histograms
- creating a higher-level subdirectory (per module)
- proper changing the directory to avoid clashes between the modules and subdetectors
- interactive plotting of the filled histograms
a name for such a class has been discussed earlier with Marjorie and Liz Sexton, RootHistModule seems to be an appropriate name for such a class George raized an issue of using HBOOK for histogramming. Technically this is also possible, one can either use HBOOK directly from C++ ( using cern_i/hbook.h interface) or to use HepTuple. However if people are using both ROOT and HBOOK within the same job, at least 2 different histogram files will be produced in the end. HBOOK file can be converted into ROOT format using h2root utility George also asked if it is possible to convert PAW "almost-FORTRAN" COMIS files into ROOT "almost-C++ " scripts. Pasha suggested using f2c , but the experiment performed right after the meeting showed that it is much easier to do it manually . The conversion requires certain work but technically is pretty much straitforward. There is no easy way known to convert KUIP macros into C++.