From gwatts@phys.washington.edu Mon May 3 13:58:07 2004 Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 17:13:26 -0700 From: Gordon Watts To: mverzocc@fnal.gov, d0dfwg@fnal.gov, Terry Wyatt Subject: RE: Comments from the WZ group on data format issues Hi, What do you type d0dfwg as? :-) I noticed you mentioned the vertexing in several different places -- and now you repeat it in more detail. No one, as far as I know, uses the Beam Spot vertexing officially. The Vertex group, for example, hasn't certified it (as far as I know). BID certainly doesn't use it yet. The certified Vertex algorithm is current implemented in d0root and also in the framework. It is a royal pain getting one to work after doing the other and keeping them up to date. Basically, someone is lots to non-intellectual work; just reproducing someone else's work. This is one of the reasons to have a common format that can run in reco. The BS constraint isn't implemented in the framework. The hooks are present, and they just have to be written. Would probably take someone of order 1 week if they knew what they were doing. The problem is the chicken and the egg (i.e. getting a BS database). No one has thought through that little difficulty yet. Cheers, Gordon. -----Original Message----- From: Marco Verzocchi [mailto:mverzocc@fnal.gov] Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 4:08 PM To: Gordon Watts; d0dfwg@fnal.gov; Terry Wyatt Subject: Re: Comments from the WZ group on data format issues Hi Gordon yes I consider running inside d0correct acceptable and I agree that for things like b-tagging that is probably always going to happen. But as time goes by I think it would be nice to move version -1 to D0reco. And we should be already doing that, particularly for vertexing. I honestly don't understand why there is no effort at all in porting the current vertexing algorithm to D0reco. And version 0 (by which I mean the most recent one) should be ported to d0correct. For vertexing I really have the impression that this is just not happening. And quite honestly if this starts happening for things like calorimeter corrections, I quite frankly believe that the experiment is *****ed. For electrons this was not the case because Volker was really strong in taking the approach that everything would go into the framework, no matter what and that if somebody wanted to support doing the corrections inside the TMBtree they would have to figure out how and reuse the code which was written for the framework. Marco PS (And the fact that we don't have version 0 in D0reco would be just because we probably won't figure out a way of calculating the beam spot before running the offline reconstruction) PS d0dfwg is really an ugly acronym, I mistype it every time...........