Bug fixes in PhaseIIADCCalibrator and PhaseIIADCHitFinder - #391
JohannMartyn wants to merge 5 commits into
Conversation
Previously we compared the ADC sample value with and index value. This is corrected now and we compare an index value with an index value.
Previously the adc_threshold was subtracted from the peak value. Now the baseline is subtracted.
This method works similar the the "Fixed_2023_Gains" method, but it fully avoids the incorrect double hit counting.
|
Looks good to me - one recommendation though: Could you update the config file to reflect the new That way users know which option to use. We will also require an additional PR to change the configs in the |
|
I do not know exactly what you mean by "config file". So I changed the initialization of |
|
Sorry the README is what I meant - thanks for doing this! This is now ready to merge. Please open another PR (either you or Anuj) to update the hit finding config in the event building so it reflects this method change. |
Hi Johann, Steven, I can open a PR correcting the hit finding config in EventBuilderV2, related toolchains and also BeamClusterAnalysis, in case people run hit finding in EventBuilding OFF mode. If that's alright with both of you ? |
Sure, that is fine by me. |
PhaseIIADCCalibrator had a bug in the baseline subtraction. It compared an ADC value with an index (time sample) instead of comparing two indices.
PhaseIIADCHitFinder had a bug in the Fixed_2023_Gains pulse finding algorithm, where a pulse could be counted two times. Added a new pulse finding algorithm called "NoDoubleHits" which is a fixed version of the "Fixed_2023_Gains" method.
Checklist before submitting your PR
newusage, there is a reason the data must be on the heapnewthere is adelete, unless I explicitly know why (e.g. ROOT or a BoostStore takes ownership)Additional Material
See ANNIE-doc-6987 for more details.