GSI Forum: Bugs, Fixes, Releases » [Inconsistency?] ROOT 6.06 vs. 6.10

Home » PANDA » PandaRoot » Bugs, Fixes, Releases » [Inconsistency?] ROOT 6.06 vs. 6.10

Show: Today's Messages :: Polls :: Message Navigator

[Inconsistency?] ROOT 6.06 vs. 6.10 [message #21900]

Tue, 05 December 2017 17:42

Ralf Kliemt
Messages: 507
Registered: May 2007
Location: GSI, Darmstadt

first-grade participant

From: *gsi.de

Dear all,

We found a severe inconsistency between a minor step-up from ROOT 6.06 to 6.10, effecting our simulations. I tested a FairSoft oct.17 release with FairRoot 17.10a. I installed a second version with the older ROOT version, in order to pin the issue down to ROOT.

From the release notes of ROOT I found that the geometry classes were subject to a larger change in ROOT 6.08.
The effect is, that the track length in the STT (see attached pdf, page 2, upper row, middle) is capped at about 1000.

Did anyone see that effect, too?

Cheers!
Ralf

Attachment: comparing.pdf
(Size: 49.63KB, Downloaded 337 times)

Report message to a moderator

Re: [Inconsistency?] ROOT 6.06 vs. 6.10 [message #21902 is a reply to message #21900]

Wed, 06 December 2017 08:48

Radoslaw Karabowicz
Messages: 108
Registered: June 2004
Location: GSI

continuous participant

From: *gsi.de

Extremely interesting. Is the discrepancy also present in the MCTrack branch?
Number of secondaries? energies?
It is very strange that not all detectors are affected.

Report message to a moderator

Re: [Inconsistency?] ROOT 6.06 vs. 6.10 [message #21905 is a reply to message #21900]

Wed, 06 December 2017 10:58

Ralf Kliemt
Messages: 507
Registered: May 2007
Location: GSI, Darmstadt

first-grade participant

From: *gsi.de

Hi Radek,

Yes, we have that already in the MCTrack banch. Good call.
Plots in the pdf below.

This is really worrying.

Attachment: comparing.pdf
(Size: 60.66KB, Downloaded 268 times)

Report message to a moderator

Re: [Inconsistency?] ROOT 6.06 vs. 6.10 [message #21910 is a reply to message #21900]

Wed, 06 December 2017 16:49

Ralf Kliemt
Messages: 507
Registered: May 2007
Location: GSI, Darmstadt

first-grade participant

From: *gsi.de

It seems ROOT does not like the DIRC support structures. The GEANT stepping aborts very often with
Quote:

************************************************************************ *********************************
* G4Track Information: Particle = mu-, Track ID = 4, Parent ID = 0
************************************************************************ *********************************

Step# X(mm) Y(mm) Z(mm) KinE(MeV) dE(MeV) StepLeng TrackLeng NextVolume ProcName
10002 343 -288 446 1.86e+03 0 0 632 DrcBarSupportS Transportation
10003 343 -288 446 1.86e+03 0 0 632 DrcBarSupportS Transportation
10004 343 -288 446 1.86e+03 0 0 632 DrcBarSupportS Transportation
10005 343 -288 446 1.86e+03 0 0 632 DrcBarSupportS Transportation

I contacted Roman to investigate further. Attached you'll find my comparison plots with and without the whole DIRC.

Ralf

Attachment: comparing-all.pdf
(Size: 265.72KB, Downloaded 275 times)
Attachment: comparing-nodrc.pdf
(Size: 315.81KB, Downloaded 207 times)

Report message to a moderator

Re: [Inconsistency?] ROOT 6.06 vs. 6.10 [message #21911 is a reply to message #21910]

Thu, 07 December 2017 10:58

Roman Dzhygadlo
Messages: 15
Registered: July 2013
Location: GSI

occasional visitor

From: *gsi.de

Hi guys,

the issue is connected to the TGeoTubeSeg volume which has problems with new fairsoft packages (root6.10/geant10.2 ?)
I replaced it with TGeoTube with some volume subtraction. With new geometry it looks like everything is fine again.

cheers,
Roman

Report message to a moderator

Re: [Inconsistency?] ROOT 6.06 vs. 6.10 [message #21960 is a reply to message #21900]

Fri, 15 December 2017 10:13

Ralf Kliemt
Messages: 507
Registered: May 2007
Location: GSI, Darmstadt

first-grade participant

From: *gsi.de

There was another drc geometry update.
The problems become less. That's good.

You can find the comparison between the root versions below.

Ralf

Attachment: comparing-drcfix2.pdf
(Size: 314.45KB, Downloaded 265 times)

Report message to a moderator

Re: [Inconsistency?] ROOT 6.06 vs. 6.10 [message #21965 is a reply to message #21960]

Fri, 15 December 2017 10:28

Tobias Stockmanns
Messages: 489
Registered: May 2007

first-grade participant

From: *ikp.kfa-juelich.de

The largest descrepancies seem to be for the straw tube detectors. In Root 6.10 they have much more entries for long track length.
In addition the number of secondaries seems to be less in Root 6.10 (at least the MCTrack.fMotherID does not extend to numbers beyond 800).

What is the suggestion to proceed?

Cheers,

Tobias

Report message to a moderator

Re: [Inconsistency?] ROOT 6.06 vs. 6.10 [message #21970 is a reply to message #21900]

Fri, 15 December 2017 10:53

Ralf Kliemt
Messages: 507
Registered: May 2007
Location: GSI, Darmstadt

first-grade participant

From: *gsi.de

Hi.

Since we're looking at a "fresh" bug by root I favor to make the release with Root 6.06, i.e. the "old" FairSoft/FairRoot combination, which is running well, so far. The bug in root seems to be addressed already in their master branch (thanks Radek!) and we shall simply skip the latest FairSoft release until we get the fix.

In the future we'll be more flexible with the alibuild structure!

Cheers!

Ralf

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic:	PID selection
Next Topic:	New Release dec17

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Tue Nov 26 06:14:38 CET 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00974 seconds