-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 35
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Andy Buckley's comments on EDM4hep MC structures #208
Comments
From a quick search it looks like if we want to stay able to run the Maybe @MikaelBerggren can comment. |
Ok, it would not apply to data but it would be used in the interpretation of them. |
Concerning the use of float for the momentum: this really should be double (for all kinematic quantities). Probably lost in translation from LCIO (https://github.com/iLCSoft/LCIO/blob/master/src/cpp/include/pre-generated/EVENT/MCParticle.h#L145-L173) somewhere. |
I suppose (part of) the rationale for having |
Ah, yes. Had forgotten about this peculiarity. I believe the argument was sth. like, we don't necessarily need double precision on the file but in memory for (potentially repeated) computations of 4-vectors, masses combining particles. |
On the colour information: Yes it is used in TrueJet, to figure out the di-jet grouping in 4-or-more quark events Often this is straight-forward (two quarks with a common boson mother, only one grouping possible that doesn't imply FCNC, ...), but eg. for a uudd event, without explicit Z or W parents, the colour-connection is used. I think that this is only done exactly at the junction between the M.E. generator and the P.S. code part of the event-record, i.e. exactly at the point where the LesHouches event-record transfers such information between the components of the event generation. The colour-flow within the P.S. is not needed, I'm pretty sure. |
Hi, we looked at the mapping between HEPMC3 and EDM4HEP. Attached as EDM Comparison.pdf is One point is that we like the idea of EDM4HEP to provide "const" Our "main" suggestion is to define the structures (see the pdf) and The HepMC authors seem open to the possibility of providing writing to In the issue we saw some comments:
HepMC can contain color-flow information as particle attributes.
HepMC does provide some attributes for theta and phi as particle
It would be useful to include the model name (hopefully a naming scheme Alan and Dirk |
At yesterdays EDM4hep meeting (see the attached notes there for more details) we have concluded to:
|
Just a thought about the MCParticle Vertex/Endpoint information, which was mentioned in the EDM4hep meeting. After the Geant4 Simulation the vertex and endpoint information of particles is updated to align with what happens during the simulation, for example deflection due to the magnetic field. It also happens that we don't update endpoints because we don't simulate certain particles for reason (see some tickets in DD4hep about this, e.g.). Thus fiddling the MC tree back into Particle/Vertex separation would probably be some effort, and maybe more confusing than what we see in the MC record now. |
Closing this, since we are happy with our current implementation of the MCParticle. |
Received these comments form Andy Buckley as follow up of his presentation on HepMCv3 at 2nd ECFA workshop on Generators.
The colour flow is the obvious defunct quantity, which has no obvious meaning at detector-level anyway -- I am assuming that EDM4HEP is not attempting to replicate the generator-level event graph, as it doesn't seem to have all the required extra for that. Are you aware of anything actually trying to use colour flows at the EDM level? It would only make sense for afterburner generators, and even then relies on specific internal meanings assigned by the original generator: I know of no generator codes, and certainly no post-generation ones, that attempt to implement afterburner corrections for non-colour-singlet states.
The other points that I had in mind were more comments or initial reactions from the MC perspective on:
spin: similar to the color flow, what is the use-case for this? I believe passing spins for afterburner decays properly requires a spinor basis to be propagated, as well as the vector: this has caused many problems, as existing standards don't propagate enough information and guesses need to be made. Is there detector physics that can use a spin information, even without this extra basis info?
float charge: I'm accustomed to the integer 3-charge representation in HepPID and MCUtils. Certainly it makes sense for MC-gen level, to handle quark states. But more generally, why store the charge when there is a standard scheme and decoding software to extract the charge from the PDG ID code? (True fractional-charge exotic particles are very niche.)
double mass vs float-valued 3-momentum vs double-valued positions: is there a rationale for this? I note that float in the Cartesian representation turned out to not be precise enough for LHC forward physics; not sure if it would be sufficient for the same at e.g. a future ep machine. Also worth thinking about whether an eta-phi fundamental representation could make more sense... was this already done?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: