Home » R3BRoot » Data Analysis » Data levels in R3Broot - suggestion
| Re: Data levels in R3Broot - suggestion [message #18967 is a reply to message #18966] |
Wed, 03 February 2016 08:16   |
Dmytro Kresan
Messages: 166
Registered: June 2004
|
first-grade participant |
From: *gsi.de
|
|
Hector Alvarez Pol wrote on Tue, 02 February 2016 19:34
- I agree with the Mapped, Cal, Hit as expressed by Ralf, but this is not a complete list. There could be intermediate calibration levels and different complexity of Hit structures. So, we should give space for Mapped, PreCal1, PreCal2, ..., Cal, Hit, Cluster, Track
Ralf has mentioned about introducing intermediate levels on demand. This option is definitely not excluded.
Hector Alvarez Pol wrote on Tue, 02 February 2016 19:34
- I would not use the word Item for data levels. Just the name composed of R3BDetectorLevel (as in R3BLandCal). For me it should clear enough and identify it .
This will work better, since names of data classes are used more often in the analysis code than names of tasks.
Hector Alvarez Pol wrote on Tue, 02 February 2016 19:34
- I would use instead a modifier for the classes converting data levels. The class to obtain a given level would be R3BDetectorLevelFinder. Another synonym for Finder could also make the job, if you find any better.
To my opinion - "Finder" is in some cases misleading. It is suitable for clusters reconstruction, hit finding, etc, but not for calibration.
|
|
|
|
Current Time: Tue Apr 23 17:25:00 CEST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01037 seconds
|
GSI Forum
Search
Help
Members
Login
Home
