Hi, Chi!
I guess a thorough BAT analysis will be done when we recrunch raw data
files anyway. By then Wang will also have his BAT recon details finished
(and a preliminary BAT analysis before the collaboration meeting, if I
remember correctly what he said)... then the sooner the raw recrunch
happens, the better in my opinion. For now a recrunch from DST
will still give me better e-p event selection due to improved offsets.
I finished my changes to the e-p event selection and I created the
structure for the BATs (and their CCs) in ep_skim (inside both lrn and
lrd).
Any idea who changed fBat to fSB? I guess it does not matter now that
much, just curious...
Cheers!
Adrian
On Sun, 13 Jun 2004, Chi Zhang wrote:
>
> Hi, some bad news for BATS fans.
>
> 1. bats hits are not included in DST. there goes recrunch for BATS this
> time. If you want bats, you ll have to recrunch from raw data. This is
> because BATS are not linked to any tracks therefore not filled into DST.
>
> A few weeks ago, I implemented unmatched outer dectectors into DST, but I
> did not include BATS because they were not online at the moment. That
> change was on CVS head anyway so not ever used for blast account
> crunching.
>
> 2. The recent check in from blast account causes seg-faults for a simple
> reason, someone changed fBat to fSB, yet inside the root files, the branch
> is called fBat. I have changed it back, please do not use fSB anymore
> even though you might have a strong feeling toward that name.
>
> Chi
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Feb 24 2014 - 14:07:31 EST