Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update on S1PatternLikelihood cut #123

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jan 5, 2018
Merged

Update on S1PatternLikelihood cut #123

merged 4 commits into from
Jan 5, 2018

Conversation

skazama
Copy link
Contributor

@skazama skazama commented Jan 4, 2018

It was found that previous s1 pattern likelihood is calculated based on observed positions. Because expected PMT hit-patterns are calculated using true interact positions, thus s1 pattern likelihood should also be calculated using field-distortion-corrected positions.
In PositionReconstruction minitrees, there is a variable named "s1_pattern_fit_hax", and the cut is reoptimized based on this variable. Details can be seen in https://xe1t-wiki.lngs.infn.it/doku.php?id=xenon:xenon1t:kazama:s1_pattern_cut_sr1#update_2018_jan_4th

It was found that previous s1 pattern likelihood is calculated based on observed positions. Because expected PMT hit-patterns are calculated using true interact positions, thus s1 pattern likelihood should also be calculated using field-distortion-corrected positions.
In PositionReconstruction minitrees, there is a variable named "s1_pattern_fit_hax", and the cut is reoptimized based on this variable. Details can be seen in https://xe1t-wiki.lngs.infn.it/doku.php?id=xenon:xenon1t:kazama:s1_pattern_cut_sr1#update_2018_jan_4th
@skazama skazama requested review from pdeperio and sreichard January 4, 2018 06:28
@coderdj
Copy link
Contributor

coderdj commented Jan 4, 2018

Hi Shingo. Linked note Figure U.1. Do you mean 'r' instead of 'z'?

I think if we decide to adopt this variable we should rename it 's1_pattern_fit' and keep as default, but that's a hax issue probably.

Copy link
Contributor

@pdeperio pdeperio left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think should be fine to keep this variable name for now so we don't have to change Extended treemaker and regenerate all those minitrees.

@skazama Can you please cross-check acceptance on SR0 too?

@skazama
Copy link
Contributor Author

skazama commented Jan 5, 2018

@coderdj In Fig U.1, it is actually "z" (I divided z-region into two regions). Because field distortion effect in low-z region is more significant than that for top-z region, thus I compared them, but will also check inner and outer region.

@pdeperio
Copy link
Contributor

pdeperio commented Jan 5, 2018

I'm ok to merge, and re-check SR0 acceptance in @sreichard's framework later.

Copy link
Contributor

@sreichard sreichard left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@pdeperio we can definitely do that

@pdeperio pdeperio merged commit b8ba01a into master Jan 5, 2018
@pdeperio pdeperio deleted the skazama-new-s1pattern branch January 5, 2018 19:23
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants