Aaron,
Can you update a runlist accordinly. I don't think that no-ADC data runs
are particularly bad. I'm more worried about this no-Charge business.
Cheers, Vitaliy
Aaron Joseph Maschinot wrote:
>b/c of the recent "no-ADC" data runs, i've been looking through the data
>files. i've found some bad things...
>
>1) karen estimated that the no-ADC data runs started at run 9243 and go
> through run 9263. however, runs 9241 and 9242 both have something
> wrong with them, too; the vector polarizations from these runs are
> just wrong. maybe the ADC was "sort of" signaling in these runs.
> anyway, for the present, i think we should not include them in the
> analysis.
>
>2) more scary is the fact that some files appear not to be recording
> charge data. up to just a couple of minutes ago, i thought that root
> would issue a warning if no charge was found. however, run 9232 has
> no charge in it but root doesn't give any warning about this fact. if
> other such "no-charge-but-root-doesn't-mind" files exist, then they
> will clearly have a BIG impact on polarization.
>
> for example, the vector dilution of runs 9230 9231 9233 9234 is
> "normal" (around 0.57 or so). however, if i include run 9232 in the
> listing (as it is listed in pol.log), the dilutions become -0.137 and
> 0.062!!! admittedly, i haven't been looking at each data file,
> one-on-one, in order to see if there is anything wrong with it (i.e.
> no charge, no ADC, etc.); it's kind of hard to do that with 200-300
> files. but, clearly, even one such bad file can mess up three others
> drastically.
>
>3) runs 9098, 9099, 9101, and 9102, though listed as "good" files, all
> have no ADCs. the log-book says that the right-sector WC's didn't have
> any HV around this time. maybe this somehow affected the runs.
> however, these files' charges have been being taken into account for
> total charge to normalize by.
>
>i'm going to update pol.log. however, it seems to me that a file-by-file
>check is necessary. maybe a scanning short scanning program could be
>written that will, for each file, make sure that it has charge, TDCs,
>ADCs, etc. it seems that, do to the large number of incoming files, it
>would seem appropriate for the shift taker to run such a file (else
>everyone else who does analysis will have to individually check ALL the
>files).
>
>aaron
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Feb 24 2014 - 14:07:31 EST