Physics Shift Report¶
Start Date: 2 June
End Date: 2 June
Start Run: 6715
End Run: 6729
Physics shifter: Ryan Bayes
Purpose of the shift was to redo the Q1-3 scan for Jaroslaw, taking special note of the number of TOF1 triggers. Unfortunately a reconstruction error (apparently for both online and offline) has made immediate evaluation of the runs difficult. Consultation with Adam has suggested that there may be a problem with the MAUS release --- although it should be noted that MAUS release 0.9.4 was used for the GRID reconstruction.
The log description of the shift was sparse. There were no log comments during data collection aside from BLOC reports on the target later settings. The shift summary contained all of the pertinent information including errors that might have been expected to appear in more detail in the elog.
Run Condition Summary Spreadsheet/CDB¶Run Condition summary was not posted to the usual places as of 17:00 3 June. All CDB entries listed for the shift registered as "ok".
- edit(6 June): Because the online and offline reconstruction did not work for this run, all of the CDB entries were inspected visually to extract the number of TOF0 triggers. A subset of runs report an end of run signal as "null" because of an abortive or anomalous termination of the run in by RunControl. The affected runs include 6718, 6726, and 6727. The physics devil output does not catch missed end-of-run records in CDB; even though it is not a problem operationally for the reconstruction or simulation, it should probably be flagged anyway as a gap in overall record keeping.
Analysis¶Have relied on the automated physics devil to evaluate the analysis. All runs have shown a reconstruction error which may be a problem in MAUS. Investigation is underway regarding the cause of the error.
- edit(6 June): The problem is due to an error in the unpacking which prevented online and offline reconstruction and is in the process of being corrected. A new release of MAUS is in progress and it is being tested with the online reconstruction.
- edit(6 June): In absence of information from the reconstruction, the relative rates of the beam settings were evaluated using the number of TOF0 triggers recorded in CDB. Comparison of the number of triggers per pulse for the various runs indicates that the "nominal" beam line setting provides the best particle beam rate (82 triggers per pulse) while the settings corresponding to task 5.6 in the beam settings provides a close second (80 triggers per pulse). All the other settings provided less than 65 triggers per pulse. A full spreadsheet will be posted.