1 / 13

Mokka vs. LCDG4 Comparison

This document provides a comparison between Mokka and LCDG4, highlighting recent updates discussed at the DHCal meeting on October 08, 2003. The comparison includes changes such as implementing binary stdhep input into Mokka, adjusting RangeCut, and studying the Nhits dependence on energy thresholds. It addresses discrepancies in ECal and HCal, suggesting the need for Geant3 cross-checks, improved sampling fractions, and understanding peaks at ECal absorbers. The document outlines processing times per event for different particles and suggests next steps for reliable comparisons, emphasizing the importance of consistent materials, energy considerations, and investigating discrepancies' origins.

lhorsley
Download Presentation

Mokka vs. LCDG4 Comparison

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Mokka vs. LCDG4 Comparison Guilherme Lima DHCal Meeting October 08, 2003

  2. Updates since last week • CVS updates and tags, for documenting available data • Move into new server (thanks Jeremy!) • Implement binary stdhep input into Mokka (processing is under way) • Change RangeCut from 0.7mm to 0.1mm • Study dependence of Nhits with changes in energy thresholds

  3. Comparing apples to apples… • Geant version (4.5.1 in nicadd, 4.5.2_p01 on k2) • Geometry (SDJan03, projective) • Physics list: identical data files • Range cuts (0.7mm, changed to 0.1mm) • No energy thresholds • Text output implemented into projective LCDG4 • Same angular distributions (input from binary stdhep file): theta = 90deg , flat in phi • Geant4 external data files not used (don’t matter?) • Materials (some differences, maybe ok for cals?) • No bugs!!!

  4. Ecal: number of hits

  5. Hcal: number of hits Thresholds At 700 keV

  6. ECal Nhits x threshold – 50 GeV muons

  7. Ecal Nhits x threshold – 50 GeV pions

  8. Ecal Nhits x threshold – 50 GeV positrons

  9. Hcal Nhits x threshold – 50 Gev particles

  10. Number of hits per layer

  11. Cross checking: Ecal+Hcal, abs+cell

  12. Conclusions • Some low-level discrepancies in both ECal and HCal (materials?!) • Should we go for Geant3 cross checks? • Need better sampling fractions (Vishnu?) • Need to understand peaks at ECal absorbers • Keep an eye on processing times: • 1.3 sec/evt (50 GeV muons) • 19 sec/evt (50 GeV pions) • 30 sec/evt (50 GeV positrons)

  13. Next steps • Still some checks needed for reliable comparisons: • Make sure materials used are the same • Energy = 50 GeV, not momentum • Investigate origin of discrepancies • Think about digitization (energies into ADC counts)

More Related