210 likes | 309 Views
First attempt of physics analysis in LHC++. Objectivity (DB) + IRIS(HEP)Explorer (Analysis tool) Explorer under CONTINUOUS DEVELOPMENT : in last months big steps done (more and more features are going to be implemented)
E N D
First attempt of physics analysis in LHC++ • Objectivity (DB) + IRIS(HEP)Explorer (Analysis tool) • Explorer under CONTINUOUSDEVELOPMENT : in last months big steps done (more and more features are going to be implemented) • First attempt of analysis: Ntuple (conversion) Analysis (translation/Explorer map) Performance(Explorer vs PAW PRELIMINARY !!) Silvia Resconi
How to start automatic method to convert a RWN/CWN into Objectivity :(afs/cern.ch/user/d/dinofm/public/lhcxxdoc/ntupleconv.html) a0150.hbook (CWN) 7000ATLFAST evts (ATLAS fast sim progr)A (MSSM Higgs Boson) jet-lept-ptmiss Events.AtlasNt.DB: (double occupancy -> to be optimized) Silvia Resconi
HEPLoop module equivalent of PAW NT/LOOP : - It generates automatically the skeleton of the analysis class (*.cpp) in which: the user can fill the methods with his/her own C++ analysis code (reconstruction algorithms / cuts / histograms) - It compiles the code, creates a shared library and executes the loopon events Translation of analysis code from Fortran to C++ : - addedinclude file (Setting.h) to set cuts - addedmethods to calculate some useful variables (invariant mass, pseudorapidity..) - histograms Silvia Resconi
14 modules needed to build the MAP: (14 is NO MORE a limit !!) not easy to manage... CONFUSION on the screen SIMPLIFY building GROUPS and GROUPS of GROUPS to obtain an easier map every GROUP can be saved and reused in other maps Silvia Resconi
the user has max freedom to choose: grouping criteria (which modules to group) interesting parameters of each module to save in the group - Group Editor - graphical interface of the group (choice of widget type/dimension) - Control Panel Editor - my choices Silvia Resconi
a very preliminary comparison with PAW (HP735/99): . Time to loop over ~7000 evts : Explorer PAW Elapsed time : ~ 12.2 s ~7 s CPU user time : ~ 8.05 s ~5.5 s factor ~ 1.5 slower than PAW . Time to launch my map (14 modules, 2 HistOOgramPlot, 1 Render) : on average~ 40 s . Some plots : Explorer vs PAW Silvia Resconi
Paw Explorer Silvia Resconi
Paw Explorer Silvia Resconi
Paw Explorer Silvia Resconi
Dino asked for : wishes/complaints/suggestions wishes: development/implementation of new features/ modules/connections to build a more complex analysis/map Optimization of timing/occupancies (check with ~100000 evts) to test deeply Explorer performances Silvia Resconi
complaints: (from the user point of view) maps with lots of modules are NOT easy to manage working with GROUPS permits to obtain easier maps BUT the user not always has time to take care also of the graphical interface suggestions: (for the developers) simplify Explorer : create for the user predefined groups/maps decrease number of clicks in some modules merge modules (where it is possible) to decrease the number of connections/windows on the screen Silvia Resconi