Home » PANDA » PandaRoot » Analysis » [FIXED] Mc Truth Match
[FIXED] Mc Truth Match [message #15239] |
Mon, 19 August 2013 16:20 |
Klaus Götzen
Messages: 293 Registered: June 2006 Location: GSI
|
first-grade participant |
From: *gsi.de
|
|
Hi,
I just did a quick MC truth check with the tutorial macro. Therefore I filled three lists 'piall', 'mcpi', and 'pimatch' with
pimatch.Cleanup();
theAnalysis->FillList(mcpi,"PionLoose","PidAlgoIdealCharged");
theAnalysis->FillList(piall,"PionAll");
for ( int ii=0 ; ii<piall.GetLength() ; +ii )
if ( theAnalysis->McTruthMatch(piall[ii]) )
pimatch.Add( piall[ii] );
In 'mcpi' selection is based on PidAlgoIdealCharge, 'piall' contains all charged tracks with pion PID assigned, and 'pimatch' is selected from this with the McTruthMatch methode.
Then I counted the number of candidates in 'pimatch' and 'mcpi', both with and without McTruth object assigned. The result looks like this for 1000 events of the tutorial channel:
pi:1443 (with McTruth:1443) mcpi:1521 (with McTruth:1521)
As you can see, in my test all selected candidates had an attached McTruth object. Second thing is, that there is a discrepancy in the number of candidates in both methods. I think I found the reason for this.
Let's therefore take a look to the candidates in all lists for one case of mismatch, where for each candidate it is shown [track number; PDG; charge; PID probs; PDG of truth object]:
pimatch(1) : [#2; 211; C=1; P=(0;0;1;0;0;); True=211]
mcpi(2) : [#1; 211; C=1; P=(0;0;1;0;0;); True=-211] [#2; 211; C=1; P=(0;0;1;0;0;); True=211]
piall(4) : [#0; -211; C=-1; P=(0;1;0;0;0;); True=13] [#1; 211; C=1; P=(0;0;1;0;0;); True=-211] [#2; 211; C=1; P=(0;0;1;0;0;); True=211] [#3; 211; C=1; P=(0;1;0;0;0;); True=-13]
As one can see, in 'pimatch' the PDG code of the selected object is exactly the same (including charge!) as of the corresponding McTruth object, whereas in 'mcpi' for track #1 PDG and true PDG have opposite sign.
So the reason for the difference is, that tracks with (for whatever reason) mis-reconstructed charge are accepted by ideal PidAlgo, since this one only requires certain pion PID probability without knowledge of charge, whereas the McTruthMatch performes an exact match including correct charge.
Therefore I guess, one should use the McTruthMatch methode or compare the reco PDG code to McTruth PDG code in order to do a proper counting and efficiency measurement.
Best,
Klaus
[Updated on: Fri, 30 August 2013 23:47] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Mc Truth Match [message #15244 is a reply to message #15239] |
Mon, 19 August 2013 17:44 |
MartinJGaluska
Messages: 203 Registered: March 2010 Location: Germany
|
first-grade participant |
From: *physik.uni-giessen.de
|
|
Hi Klaus,
Quote: |
So the reason for the difference is, that tracks with (for whatever reason) mis-reconstructed charge are accepted by ideal PidAlgo, since this one only requires certain pion PID probability without knowledge of charge, whereas the McTruthMatch performes an exact match including correct charge.
|
The same seems to be true when the charge is specified in FillList
theAnalysis->FillList(mcpiplus,"PionLoosePlus","PidAlgoIdealCharged");
which was surprising to me. I used to think that when you use PidAlgoIdealCharged and asked for positively charged particles, then you would only get particles whose charge was correctly identified. However, with a quick check (also over 1000 events with the rho tutorial macros) I find 34 events with differences.
The total results are
pimatchplus = 359 piplus = 374
pimatchminus = 374 piminus = 394
and were obtained with the following code:
pimatchplus.Cleanup();
pimatchminus.Cleanup();
theAnalysis->FillList(mcpiplus,"PionLoosePlus","PidAlgoIdealCharged");
theAnalysis->FillList(mcpiminus,"PionLooseMinus","PidAlgoIdealCharged");
theAnalysis->FillList(piall,"PionAll");
for ( int ii=0 ; ii<piall.GetLength() ; ++ii ){
if ( theAnalysis->McTruthMatch(piall[ii]) ){
if ( 211 == piall[ii]->PdgCode() ){
pimatchplus.Add( piall[ii] );
}
if ( -211 == piall[ii]->PdgCode() ){
pimatchminus.Add( piall[ii] );
}
}
}
// consistency check (show suspicious events)
if ( ( pimatchplus.GetLength()!= mcpiplus.GetLength() ) || ( pimatchminus.GetLength() != mcpiminus.GetLength() ) ){
cout << "evt " << i << endl;
cout << "pimatchplus = " << pimatchplus.GetLength() << " piplus = " << mcpiplus.GetLength() << endl;
cout << "pimatchminus = " << pimatchminus.GetLength() << " piminus = " << mcpiminus.GetLength() << endl;
++nsuspiciousevents;
}
npimatchplus += pimatchplus.GetLength();
npimatchminus += pimatchminus.GetLength();
nmcpiplus += mcpiplus.GetLength();
nmcpiminus += mcpiminus.GetLength();
If the user is aware of these differences, then it should not be a problem, I think, even if the behaviour is a little counter-intuitive when you specify the charge in FillList.
|
|
|
|
Re: Mc Truth Match [message #15246 is a reply to message #15239] |
Mon, 19 August 2013 21:28 |
Klaus Götzen
Messages: 293 Registered: June 2006 Location: GSI
|
first-grade participant |
From: *adsl.alicedsl.de
|
|
Hi Martin,
actually it's not the case that FillList with option "XyzPlus" fills in as well negative particles. The results you shown confirm my observation I guess:
Your number piplus = 374 include all 359 pimatchplus particles, and in addition 15 negative pions, which were reconstructed wrongly as postive pions (perhaps the sign of the curvature or flight direction was fitted wrongly) and of course have as well a pion PID probability of 1.
So what you see is not negative charged particles selected by "PionLoosePlus", but reco tracks with positive charge, whose hits in reality were created by a particle with negative charge.
But how should the PID algorithm or data provider know that the true particle was negative, when tracking says, it's postive?
To clarify: The PidAlgoIdealCharged delivers perfect PID probabilities for all particle species, but it's not meant to be a McTruth match (as I just realized today...).
Best,
Klaus
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Mc Truth Match [message #15263 is a reply to message #15256] |
Tue, 20 August 2013 13:47 |
MartinJGaluska
Messages: 203 Registered: March 2010 Location: Germany
|
first-grade participant |
From: *physik.uni-giessen.de
|
|
I tried to investigate the "theory" that the wrong charge showing up in lists filled with
theAnalysis->FillList(mcpiplus,"PionLoosePlus","PidAlgoIdealCharged");
might be due to high momentum tracks, but it does not seem to be the case. I printed the momenta of misidentified charged pions.
With a filter on GetFitStatus()>0 this is the result that I get:
p_total p_perp theta ( p_x p_y p_z )
0.157126 0.0535453 19.9243 ( 0.048933 0.0217408 0.147721 )
0.505125 0.0941352 10.7404 ( 0.0493841 -0.0801414 0.496276 )
2.11389 0.891485 24.9437 ( 0.783278 -0.425702 1.91671 )
0.396296 0.1589 23.6384 ( -0.144325 -0.0664785 0.363045 )
4.13429 1.62192 23.0983 ( -0.296381 -1.59461 3.80285 )
0.193541 0.107057 33.5834 ( -0.0956728 0.0480417 0.161236 )
0.163668 0.0834998 30.6758 ( -0.0831942 0.00713736 0.140765 )
9.32307 4.19835 26.7641 ( -3.74612 1.89545 8.32427 )
0.196377 0.0823667 24.7987 ( 0.0801052 0.0191682 0.178268 )
0.35568 0.171477 28.8232 ( -0.0621465 -0.159819 0.311616 )
2.18964 0.724932 19.334 ( -0.275077 -0.670715 2.06615 )
2.20361 1.28911 35.803 ( -1.14287 0.596375 1.7872 )
0.237624 0.202498 58.4492 ( 0.115297 -0.166469 0.124338 )
0.876789 0.855665 102.602 ( 0.416404 -0.74751 -0.191299 )
0.962982 0.289888 17.5196 ( 0.283118 -0.0622874 0.918313 )
0.275722 0.142764 31.1836 ( 0.12816 0.0629009 0.235883 )
0.331126 0.188794 34.7612 ( -0.170917 -0.080191 0.272032 )
0.411353 0.143972 20.4871 ( -0.0926718 0.110181 0.385335 )
0.192919 0.132213 43.2614 ( 0.101495 0.0847284 0.14049 )
0.694575 0.332611 28.6117 ( 0.295166 -0.153321 0.609757 )
The printout is of the form:
Total momentum, perpendicular momentum, angle to z-axis in degree, ( x-component, y-component, z-component )
While there are high momentum tracks present, also very low momentum charged pions seem to be misidentified.
If I leave out the filter on GetFitStatus()>0 I get the following:
0.0560073 0.0234772 24.7829 ( 0.000440402 0.023473 0.0508492 )
0.157126 0.0535453 19.9243 ( 0.048933 0.0217408 0.147721 )
0.505125 0.0941352 10.7404 ( 0.0493841 -0.0801414 0.496276 )
2.11389 0.891485 24.9437 ( 0.783278 -0.425702 1.91671 )
0.396296 0.1589 23.6384 ( -0.144325 -0.0664785 0.363045 )
4.13429 1.62192 23.0983 ( -0.296381 -1.59461 3.80285 )
2.10445 2.10366 91.5735 ( -1.15011 1.76143 -0.0577857 )
0.193541 0.107057 33.5834 ( -0.0956728 0.0480417 0.161236 )
0.0939326 0.0431508 27.3471 ( -0.00740239 -0.0425111 0.0834347 )
0.240746 0.107517 26.5259 ( 0.0884348 -0.0611497 0.215403 )
0.163668 0.0834998 30.6758 ( -0.0831942 0.00713736 0.140765 )
9.32307 4.19835 26.7641 ( -3.74612 1.89545 8.32427 )
0.517521 0.159474 17.9478 ( -0.0576879 0.148675 0.492337 )
0.196377 0.0823667 24.7987 ( 0.0801052 0.0191682 0.178268 )
1.23126 0.1737 8.11007 ( 0.150681 0.0864106 1.21894 )
0.35568 0.171477 28.8232 ( -0.0621465 -0.159819 0.311616 )
2.18964 0.724932 19.334 ( -0.275077 -0.670715 2.06615 )
2.20361 1.28911 35.803 ( -1.14287 0.596375 1.7872 )
0.0849093 0.028615 19.6946 ( 0.0200407 -0.0204252 0.0799423 )
0.237624 0.202498 58.4492 ( 0.115297 -0.166469 0.124338 )
0.876789 0.855665 102.602 ( 0.416404 -0.74751 -0.191299 )
0.0606288 0.0187204 17.9852 ( 0.00509841 0.0180127 0.0576663 )
0.962982 0.289888 17.5196 ( 0.283118 -0.0622874 0.918313 )
0.275722 0.142764 31.1836 ( 0.12816 0.0629009 0.235883 )
0.837384 0.837374 89.71 ( -0.561434 -0.621278 0.0042382 )
2.21517 0.731518 19.2828 ( 0.514025 -0.520478 2.0909 )
0.0869416 0.0438064 30.2557 ( -0.0430866 -0.00790857 0.0750989 )
0.336012 0.0657709 11.2879 ( 0.057233 -0.0324069 0.329512 )
0.331126 0.188794 34.7612 ( -0.170917 -0.080191 0.272032 )
0.0412819 0.0318619 50.517 ( -0.0237311 0.0212607 0.0262491 )
0.411353 0.143972 20.4871 ( -0.0926718 0.110181 0.385335 )
0.123346 0.113654 67.1346 ( 0.0525635 0.100768 0.0479286 )
0.0436396 0.0243122 33.8565 ( -0.020283 0.0134046 0.0362399 )
0.192919 0.132213 43.2614 ( 0.101495 0.0847284 0.14049 )
0.694575 0.332611 28.6117 ( 0.295166 -0.153321 0.609757 )
[Updated on: Tue, 20 August 2013 13:50] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Mc Truth Match [message #15267 is a reply to message #15266] |
Tue, 20 August 2013 14:40 |
Klaus Götzen
Messages: 293 Registered: June 2006 Location: GSI
|
first-grade participant |
From: *gsi.de
|
|
Hi Simone,
in the posting you have linked to I see some unusual PDG codes (say gammas, neurons, even muons etc) only in the gamma/neutral list.
I think the explanation for this is, that the EMC cluster algorithm identifies clusters created by all kinds of particles, and when no track can be associated to this cluster unambiguously, it simply is taken as a gamma candidate, i.e. setting PDG code to 22, charge and mass to 0.
When you check the PDG codes from the reco candidates in the 'Neutral' list, you should only see particles with PDG code 22. The associated McTruth objects indeed might have completely different PDG codes and even charges.
The FillList routine (as well as PidSelectors) actually set the PDG code according to the requested list type, but it of course doesn't touch the types of the McTruth objects.
Best,
Klaus
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Mc Truth Match [message #15271 is a reply to message #15270] |
Tue, 20 August 2013 15:50 |
MartinJGaluska
Messages: 203 Registered: March 2010 Location: Germany
|
first-grade participant |
From: *physik.uni-giessen.de
|
|
Stefano Spataro wrote on Tue, 20 August 2013 15:22 | Can you check using Tight instead of Loose?
The "Loose" corresponds to probability 20%, and if for some reason the ideal algorithm fails then all the pid probabilities will be at 20%... the rounding will give you the final (wrong) pid.
Moreover, checking the ideal algorithm code written by Ralf, there is no neutral id (of course, there is no neutral probability object).
|
Hello Stefano,
I have observed what you predicted.
With
theAnalysis->FillList(mcpiplus,"PionLoosePlus","PidAlgoIdealCharged");
I get several particles with pdg code 1000010020 in that list when simulating psi(4040) to D0 anti-D0 / D+ D- and all D decays allowed.
When I change the line to
theAnalysis->FillList(mcpiplus,"PionTightPlus","PidAlgoIdealCharged");
these entries disappear!
I have also checked the GetPidInfo() array for such RhoCandidates and the first 5 entries (index 0 to 4) have 0.2 as values.
[Updated on: Tue, 20 August 2013 15:57] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Re: Mc Truth Match [message #15273 is a reply to message #15272] |
Tue, 20 August 2013 16:18 |
StefanoSpataro
Messages: 2736 Registered: June 2005 Location: Torino
|
first-grade participant |
From: 2.235.190*
|
|
Simone Esch wrote on Tue, 20 August 2013 16:09 |
I think it is not a good idea to put everywhere the 0.2 if something at the pid stage fails.
Is there not a flag to indicate this, to be able to filter it out?
|
We have 5 particle hypothesis. If the pid algorithm fails, whatever it is, then all the 5 particles have the same probability -> 1/5 = 0.2 -> 20%. from the statistical point of view this is correct. Those tracks should not becut away, simply you don0t have pid information for them.
The point is that one should cut with probability more than such 20%, maybe the Loose condition should be moved to 25% just to be safe.
Quote: |
I understand that the PidAlgoIdealCharged just sets the right probability and nothing else, but still I thik that the name is then missleading. I thought i would use a somehow MC base algorythem which sets all characteristics right so that the FillList method really just pick the right ones.
If this is kept like this, this should be mentioned in the tutorial.
|
I have not understood, the PidAlgoIdealCharged assigns the mc id to each candidate, as it should be, using the PndPidProbability object -> a mcpion will have probability of being a pion 1 and prog of e/mu/k/p = 0, so that this info can be used by FillList. This is not "ideal" parameters, this is ideal identification. The FillList picks the correct particles identified by MC.
In this sense, PidAlgoIdealCharged is doing its job coherent with all the other algorithms, and I have not understood the last comment. Could you please be more explicit?
|
|
|
|
Re: Mc Truth Match [message #15275 is a reply to message #15273] |
Tue, 20 August 2013 16:40 |
Simone Esch
Messages: 37 Registered: August 2010 Location: Forschungszentrum Jülich...
|
continuous participant |
From: *ext.kfa-juelich.de
|
|
Ciao Stefano,
Quote: |
We have 5 particle hypothesis. If the pid algorithm fails, whatever it is, then all the 5 particles have the same probability -> 1/5 = 0.2 -> 20%. from the statistical point of view this is correct. Those tracks should not becut away, simply you don0t have pid information for them.
The point is that one should cut with probability more than such 20%, maybe the Loose condition should be moved to 25% just to be safe.
|
If we talk about real pid I agree with you. But if I am using the ideal algo, I expect all particles to have the right prob and not a prob in between which is not 1 or 0. If for the ideal algo something goes wrong I would like to know.
Quote: |
I have not understood, the PidAlgoIdealCharged assigns the mc id to each candidate, as it should be, using the PndPidProbability object -> a mcpion will have probability of being a pion 1 and prog of e/mu/k/p = 0, so that this info can be used by FillList. This is not "ideal" parameters, this is ideal identification. The FillList picks the correct particles identified by MC.
In this sense, PidAlgoIdealCharged is doing its job coherent with all the other algorithms, and I have not understood the last comment. Could you please be more explicit?
|
This is the point, the FillList picks not just the correct particles, but also wrong ones.
In my case (and for others the same) it collected also neutral particles and wrong particles in, due to there wrong charge. So I had to filter afterwards on the MCTruth characteristics to have a clean list.
And I think that this is missleading, that one has to filter afterwards for wrong particles, despite using a ideal algo.
Best Regards
Simone
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Mc Truth Match [message #15278 is a reply to message #15277] |
Tue, 20 August 2013 17:31 |
StefanoSpataro
Messages: 2736 Registered: June 2005 Location: Torino
|
first-grade participant |
From: 2.235.190*
|
|
These are reconstruction errors. You could have a real mc pion with a momentum which is completely screwed, and this is another reco error. The pid algorithm is simply associating to each track (bad or wrong, it does not care) one id from mc, when possible. When this is not possible, i.e. MVD noise tracklets, then it gives the same probability to all the ids.
If you want to have the perfect world, then you should use also ideal tracking w/o kalman, and not only ideal identification, to take out the reconstruction bias.
If you want to have a relly good ideal id on reco tracks, first one should define what is really a good track, and how to define really efficiency. But this is another issue, and the tracking discussion is also focused on this point.
|
|
|
|
Re: Mc Truth Match [message #15280 is a reply to message #15279] |
Tue, 20 August 2013 18:21 |
Klaus Götzen
Messages: 293 Registered: June 2006 Location: GSI
|
first-grade participant |
From: 140.181.11*
|
|
Hi,
I hope you agree, that sometime there might be reconstructed objects consisting of hits from different particles. In this case there is no perfect MC match. There for sure exists a best one, but this is not necessarily the correct one, so we could have indeed MC mis-match, even when using the FairLink concept (as far as I see it).
We might also think about evaluation of the two or three best matches, or providing a match quality. You may remember the discussions about these issues, which we had quite some time ago.
What I understand is, that the documentation of the tools should very clearly define what is supposed to be delivered, and where are the limitations of each tool. I'll try to clarify these issues in the tutorial and docu page accordingly.
Best and thanks for all the feedback
Klaus
|
|
|
Re: Mc Truth Match [message #15281 is a reply to message #15279] |
Tue, 20 August 2013 19:30 |
StefanoSpataro
Messages: 2736 Registered: June 2005 Location: Torino
|
first-grade participant |
From: 2.235.190*
|
|
Tobias Stockmanns wrote on Tue, 20 August 2013 17:47 | Dear Klaus,
I think your argument that there is no perfect MC match is not right. For this purpose I have written the FairLinks which are working extremly well for comparison between reconstructed data and MC data. Maybe it is time to use them for the analysis as well.
|
The problem is not in the link, the problem is that one track can be made of different mc ids, i.e. a kaon decaying into a pion w/ a very small kink. In such sense, we take the most common mc index, which could be wrong. Moreover, the mc association depends on the hits, but the momentum reconstruction, the charge and so on depend on tracking. In this sense the MC matching is only our definition, no perfect matching.
It would be good if some FairLink expert could modify the code to get rid of the mctrackassociator and of the PndTrackID TCA, since for this part the code is somehow dupplicated. Do you know if somebody could so such job?
Quote: |
For the rest of the discussion I see a discrepancy between what the designers of the code think their code is doing and the expectation of the users what the code should do according to the used names. I fear that the problem Simone and Martin had will happen to other users as well.
|
If the problem is in the semantics, then the PndPidIdealAssociatorTask count be renamed into PndPidMCAssociatorTask, if this could help.
Quote: |
In addition I think there should be a method for an ideal list filling.
|
What do you mean exactly? The "ideal" information is already stored inside the MCTrack TCA and fully accessible, and this is the info that should be used for montecarlo plots. Even because w/o covariance matrix the fitters will never work on mc tracks, and rho tools cannot be applied to mc info.
From the reconstructed candidate one can access to the mc truth, and this is available in the code.
Then, what is expected from an "ideal list filling"? If it is expected the copy from MCTrack, I remember some time ago (feb12) this was already present in the code, something like:
theAnalysis->FillList(mctrack, "McTruth");
I don't know if this code is still operational, anf if it provides what is expected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Mc Truth Match [message #15316 is a reply to message #15315] |
Thu, 22 August 2013 18:57 |
MartinJGaluska
Messages: 203 Registered: March 2010 Location: Germany
|
first-grade participant |
From: *physik.uni-giessen.de
|
|
If I just rerun the analysis macro I see differences between
theAnalysis->FillList(mcpiplus,"PionLoosePlus","PidAlgoIdealCharged");
and
theAnalysis->FillList(mcpiplus,"PionTightPlus","PidAlgoIdealCharged");
For a simulations of 10k events simulated with the rho tutorial macros I get (in total) 3 piplus and 1 piminus more with "Loose" than with "Tight". 3 misidentified particles have PdgCode 1000010020 and 1 has 1000010030. PID probability arrays are 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 in all cases.
If I only simulate 1k such events, I get no differences.
For a simulations of 1k events of psi(4040) to D0 anti-D0 / D+ D- and all D decays allowed I get (in total) 3 piplus and 1 piminus more with "Loose" than with "Tight". All misidentified particles have PdgCode 1000010020 and PID probability arrays are 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
I will rerun all simulations starting from the simulation macro and check again, but that will take until tomorrow.
[EDIT: I have just noticed that I incremented the event counter twice per event, so the number of inspected events is only half of what I wrote above]
[Updated on: Fri, 23 August 2013 10:51] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Mc Truth Match [message #15325 is a reply to message #15324] |
Fri, 23 August 2013 12:14 |
MartinJGaluska
Messages: 203 Registered: March 2010 Location: Germany
|
first-grade participant |
From: *physik.uni-giessen.de
|
|
Yes, here is the complete output that comes before I see my user generated content (for 10k events of psi(2S) to jpsi gamma and all jpsi decays).
root [0]
Processing mcmatchtestRemove.C...
(int)0
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::BuildCheck>:
The StreamerInfo of class PndDrc read from file simparams.root
has the same version (=11) as the active class but a different checksum.
You should update the version to ClassDef(PndDrc,12).
Do not try to write objects with the current class definition,
the files will not be readable.
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Double_t fPackingFraction; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Bool_t fStopTime; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Double_t fPhoMaxTime; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Bool_t fTakeDirect; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Bool_t fTakeReflected; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Int_t fFocusing; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Bool_t fTakeRealReflectivity; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Bool_t fStopSecondaries; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Bool_t fStopChargedTrackAfterDIRC; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Bool_t fSetBlackLens; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
TArrayI fProc; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Int_t fPdgCode; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Double_t fThetaC; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Int_t fEventID; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Float_t fTime_out; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Float_t fTime_in; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Float_t fLength_in; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Float_t fLength_out; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Float_t fPEnergy; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Float_t fLambda1; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Float_t fDeltaT; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Double32_t fTrackTime; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Int_t fSenId1; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Int_t fSenId2; //
Warning in <TStreamerInfo::CompareContent>: The following data member of
the in-memory layout version 11 of class 'PndDrc' is missing from
the on-file layout version 11:
Int_t fSenIdBar; //
FairRootManager::OpenOutFile("output.root")
[INFO ] The input consists out of the following trees and files:
[INFO ] - cbmsim
[INFO ] - pid_complete.root
[INFO ] Parameter and input file are available, Assure that basic info is there for the run!
[INFO ] The number of entries in chain is 10000
[INFO ] Branch: MCEventHeader. not found in Tree
[INFO ] Branch: MCEventHeader. not found in Tree
*************************************************************
initialisation for run id 1377190965
*************************************************************
-I- FairRunTimeDB::InitContainer() FairBaseParSet
Info in (PndGeoHandling::Instance): Making a new instance using the framework.
Error in <TBufferFile::CheckByteCount>: object of class PndDrc read too many bytes: 27185 instead of 27177
Warning in <TBufferFile::CheckByteCount>: PndDrc::Streamer() not in sync with data on file simparams.root, fix Streamer()
Info in <TGeoManager::CloseGeometry>: Geometry loaded from file...
Info in <TGeoManager::SetTopVolume>: Top volume is cave. Master volume is cave
Info in <TGeoNavigator::BuildCache>: --- Maximum geometry depth set to 100
Info in <TGeoManager::Voxelize>: Voxelizing...
Info in <TGeoManager::CountLevels>: max level = 12, max placements = 4896
Info in <TGeoManager::CloseGeometry>: 2008273 nodes/ 5804 volume UID's in FAIR geometry
Info in <TGeoManager::CloseGeometry>: ----------------modeler ready----------------
Container FairBaseParSet initialized from ROOT file.
*************************************************************
initialisation for run id 1377190965
*************************************************************
-I- FairRunTimeDB::InitContainer() FairBaseParSet
-I- FairRunTimeDB::InitContainer() PndSensorNamePar
Container PndSensorNamePar initialized from ROOT file.
PndFieldCreator::SetParm() 0x8890830
*************************************************************
initialisation for run id 1377190965
*************************************************************
-I- FairRunTimeDB::InitContainer() FairBaseParSet
-I- FairRunTimeDB::InitContainer() PndSensorNamePar
-I- FairRunTimeDB::InitContainer() PndMultiFieldPar
Container PndMultiFieldPar initialized from ROOT file.
OBJ: PndTransPar PndTransPar Trans. Field parameter container
OBJ: PndDipole1Par PndDipole1Par Dipole Field parameter container
OBJ: PndDipole2Par PndDipole2Par Dipole Field parameter container
OBJ: PndSolenoid1Par PndSolenoid1Par Solenoid 1st region parameter container
OBJ: PndSolenoid2Par PndSolenoid2Par Solenoid 2nd region parameter container
OBJ: PndSolenoid3Par PndSolenoid3Par Solenoid 3rd region parameter container
OBJ: PndSolenoid4Par PndSolenoid4Par Solenoid 4th region parameter container
[INFO ] PndFieldMap: Reading field map from ROOT file /home/pandaroot_jun13/trunk/input/TransMap.0890.root
[INFO ] PndFieldMap: Reading field map from ROOT file /home/pandaroot_jun13/trunk/input/DipoleMap1.0890.root
[INFO ] PndFieldMap: Reading field map from ROOT file /home/pandaroot_jun13/trunk/input/DipoleMap2.0890.root
[INFO ] PndFieldMap: Reading field map from ROOT file /home/pandaroot_jun13/trunk/input/SolenoidMap1.root
[INFO ] PndFieldMap: Reading field map from ROOT file /home/pandaroot_jun13/trunk/input/SolenoidMap2.root
[INFO ] PndFieldMap: Reading field map from ROOT file /home/pandaroot_jun13/trunk/input/SolenoidMap3.root
[INFO ] PndFieldMap: Reading field map from ROOT file /home/pandaroot_jun13/trunk/input/SolenoidMap4.root
-I- PndAnalysis::Init(): Trying now.
[INFO ] Branch: not found in Tree
[INFO ] Branch: not found in Tree
-I- PndAnalysis::ReadTCA(): No array found.
-I- PndAnalysis::Init(): Trying SttMvdGenTrack now.
[INFO ] Branch: LheGenTrack not found in Tree
[INFO ] Branch: LheGenTrack not found in Tree
-I- PndAnalysis::ReadTCA(): No LheGenTrack array found.
-I- PndAnalysis::Init(): Trying SttMvdGenTrack now.
[INFO ] Branch: SttMvdGenTrack not found in Tree
[INFO ] Branch: SttMvdGenTrack not found in Tree
-I- PndAnalysis::ReadTCA(): No SttMvdGenTrack array found.
-I- PndAnalysis::Init(): Trying SttMvdGemGenTrack now.
[INFO ] Branch: SttMvdGemGenTrack not found in Tree
[INFO ] Branch: SttMvdGemGenTrack not found in Tree
-I- PndAnalysis::ReadTCA(): No SttMvdGemGenTrack array found.
-I- PndAnalysis::Init(): Trying BarrelGenTrack now.
[INFO ] Branch: BarrelGenTrack not found in Tree
[INFO ] Branch: BarrelGenTrack not found in Tree
-I- PndAnalysis::ReadTCA(): No BarrelGenTrack array found.
-E- PndAnalysis::Init(): No track inpt array. Make a Zero TclonesArray.
-I- PndAnalysis::Init(): Second: Trying now.
[INFO ] Branch: not found in Tree
[INFO ] Branch: not found in Tree
-I- PndAnalysis::ReadTCA(): No array found.
-I- PndAnalysis::Init(): Second: Trying FTSGenTrack now.
[INFO ] Branch: FTSGenTrack not found in Tree
[INFO ] Branch: FTSGenTrack not found in Tree
-I- PndAnalysis::ReadTCA(): No FTSGenTrack array found.
-I- PndAnalysis::Init(): Second: Trying FTSTrkIdeal now.
[INFO ] Branch: FTSTrkIdeal not found in Tree
[INFO ] Branch: FTSTrkIdeal not found in Tree
-I- PndAnalysis::ReadTCA(): No FTSTrkIdeal array found.
[INFO ] Branch: PndMcTracks not found in Tree
[INFO ] Branch: PndMcTracks not found in Tree
-I- PndAnalysis::ReadTCA(): No PndMcTracks array found.
-I- PndAnalysis::Init(): Trying mc stack now.
*************************************************************
initialisation for run id 1377190965
*************************************************************
-I- FairRunTimeDB::InitContainer() FairBaseParSet
-I- FairRunTimeDB::InitContainer() PndSensorNamePar
-I- FairRunTimeDB::InitContainer() PndMultiFieldPar
-I- FairRunTimeDB::InitContainer() ANAPidSelections
[ERROR ] init() ANAPidSelections not initialized
Error in <FairRuntimeDb::initContainers()>: Error occured during initialization
[INFO ] The number of entries in chain is 10000
[INFO ] The number of entries in chain is 10000
[Edit: The output above is for the gamma simulation, I do not see the PndDrc errors in the simulation of psi(4040) to D0 anti-D0 / D+ D- and all D decays or the standard rho tutorial decay. The rest of the output is identical apart from run numbers.]
[Updated on: Fri, 23 August 2013 12:25] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Dec 02 15:34:14 CET 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00836 seconds
|