GLAST Calorimeter Software Weekly Report
Week of  12 July 2004

NRL

Sasha:  No report (on vacation)

Zach:  Working on overall design of CalRespSvc.  Have successfully created a Gaudi service, plus other "learning curve" tasks.  Have overall design in mind, starting to implement.  Here is an overview of how the system will work.

Andrey:  Finally this week I produced (with the help from Wiz, Xin, and Heather) all the necessary data (recon ROOT files with high-energy muons on EM), and I started my analysis of light-attenuation curves in crystals.

I am working now with the Xin's code to get some reasonable tapering curves, since by default the code's output - a ROOT file (taper.root) produces huge amount of not very informative histograms which I hardly can interpret...

So, I instead, using Xin's code as a backbone, try to insert my own statements to get plain ADC values from both crystal's ends for all crystals in the module.  Once I understand and convince myself I doing the correct thing I will move on and try to fit ADC data versus position applying the log-likelihood method.

Mark:  After analysis, decided that "bug" in geometry was really a bug in my understanding of how the model is put together (not very much like the hardware).  Continuing verification and documentation of geometry.

LLR

Berrie & Pol: 

Pol and I have prepared a presentation on bias correction and performance estimation of the profile tool

http://polywww.in2p3.fr/glast/polCalTalk07.pdf

We have also investigated the CAL-only direction reconstruction for both CAL-only events and CAL+TKR. We'll give an update on that later.

CENBG

Benoit: My recent activity on the CAL has focused on writing up a note, summarizing the current status of the Gsi analysis concerning the quenching effect. I will try to circulate it as soon as possible. Fred is putting a package together so that Eric can repeat the analysis at NRL.

With David Smith, we also had a look at muon direct deposit within the photodiodes, both on the experimental and simulation points of view. It seems that a fairly large discrepancy exists (a factor of a few), but further checks are still necessary.

GAM

Frederic: See CENBG report.

SLAC

 Tracy:  Both the Fuzzy and Simple clustering tools have been checked into cvs (at the head of CalRecon) and are available to use. The existing cal TDS classes support clustering output (though making the connection between clusters and crystals doesn't exist and it is also difficult to connect back to the MC). However, at this point it is possible for more detailed studies of clustering in the CalRecon. My subjective opinion is that the Fuzzy Clustering is probably overkill for this application while the Simple Clustering is too simple and needs work. However, the Fuzzy Clustering code is very complex to a simple c++ person like myself, I'd like to say the Simple Clustering code is "simple," hence easier to dig into.

UCSC

I would like to lobby for lowering the zero suppression threshold to 1 MeV from its present value of 2 MeV. Also I would like to have the algorithm in CalXtalRecAlg::computeEnergy(..) to be modified such that the acceptance for a CsI log is

double eneMin = std::min(eneP, eneM);

// below_thresh = below_thresh || ((rangeP == 0) && (eneP < m_thresh))

// || ((rangeM == 0) && (eneM < m_thresh));

below_thresh = below_thresh || (eneMin < .5*m_thresh);

Where the commented out code is what was there before. The change accepts a log if the end with least amount of energy in it is greater then 1/2 the zero-supression threshold.