Skip to content

Conversation

@vpec0
Copy link
Member

@vpec0 vpec0 commented Feb 7, 2025

I have observed the backtracker did not match OpHits to correct true particles and in general it failed to find corresponding true depositions. Looking at the OpFlash times w.r.t. the true times, the flash times came 250 us earlier. This fix is configuring the backtracker to account for that.

I have observed the backtracker did not match OpHits to correct true particles and in general it failed to find corresponding true depositions. Looking at the OpFlash times w.r.t. the true times, the flash times came 250 us earlier. This fix is configuring the backtracker to account for that.
@vpec0 vpec0 requested review from jroto and lpaulucc February 7, 2025 15:53
@jroto
Copy link
Member

jroto commented Feb 8, 2025

Hi Viktor, the backtracker used to work well... Might this delay be related to the pretrigger in the SPE template (either during the digitization or during the deconvolution?

@vpec0
Copy link
Member Author

vpec0 commented Feb 8, 2025

Hi Viktor, the backtracker used to work well... Might this delay be related to the pretrigger in the SPE template (either during the digitization or during the deconvolution?

@jroto Hi Jose. If you are referring to the deconvolved waveforms, those were not present in my tests. The offset is present in the PDHD 2024 production, which still has the old waveform sims and no deconvolution applied. Also, I note that the offset is -250 MICROseconds! The original FD configuration was +260 NANOseconds. O(100 us) should not be a result of a pretrigger window.

It may be that the signal sims were misconfigured. I may take a look later. But for now, this configuration works with the official production. See the attached plot for DT between recob::OpFlash::Time() and MCTruth generation time - pairing all true cosmic muons with all reco flashes.

dt_all_flash_true_pairs_zoomed2

@jroto
Copy link
Member

jroto commented Feb 8, 2025

This is very strange...
But many things have changed since the last MC production, so I'm not sure if this fix would work with the current configuration...

@jroto
Copy link
Member

jroto commented Feb 8, 2025

I think it should be related with this Pretrigger in the digitizer:
https://github.com/DUNE/duneopdet/blob/794b4fef7ae01302a13cd8683dca7f41693e2472/duneopdet/OpticalDetector/opticaldetectormodules_dune.fcl#L33
But this is not used anymore with the new digitizer since November.

@vpec0
Copy link
Member Author

vpec0 commented Feb 10, 2025

Here's how opdigi was configured for the production:

opdigi: {
   BackTime: 3.86e-1
   CrossTalk: 2e-1
   DarkNoiseRate: 10
   DefaultSimWindow: true
   FrontTime: 1.3e-2
   FullWaveformOutput: false
   InputModules: [
      "PDFastSim",
      "PDFastSimExternal"
   ]
   LineNoiseRMS: 2.6
   MaxAmplitude: 5.94e-2
   Padding: 100
   PeakTime: 2.8e-2
   Pedestal: 1500
   PreTrigger: 100
   PulseLength: 5.2
   ReadoutWindow: 1000
   SPEDataFile: "SPE_DAPHNE2_FBK_2022.dat"
   SSP_LED_DigiTree: false
   TestbenchSinglePE: false
   TimeBegin: 0
   TimeEnd: 1600
   VoltageToADC: 1.515e2
   algo_threshold: {
      ADCThreshold: 10
      DWindow: 10
      Name: "SSP_LED"
      Pedestal: 1500
      PreTrg: 20
      ReadoutWd: 700
   }
   module_type: "OpDetDigitizerDUNE"
}

TBH I don't see how any of this should introduce -250 us offset.

@vpec0
Copy link
Member Author

vpec0 commented Feb 10, 2025

Another thought on the matter. This 250 us may be related to the TPC pretrigger configuration.

@jroto
Copy link
Member

jroto commented Feb 10, 2025

I think so, should be related to that.

@lpaulucc
Copy link
Member

Yes, 250 us is the TPC pre-trigger. This is indeed strange...
As a side note, the config you put above, Viktor, for the opdigi of the last production does not use the testbench SPE so this is not related to this.

@aolivier23
Copy link
Contributor

Any updates on reviewing this PR? I can try to merge it Friday morning Chicago time if we can get it approved in time.

@vpec0 vpec0 marked this pull request as draft February 14, 2025 09:42
@vpec0
Copy link
Member Author

vpec0 commented Feb 14, 2025

Any updates on reviewing this PR? I can try to merge it Friday morning Chicago time if we can get it approved in time.
@aolivier23

I have converted this to a draft PR.

We don't have concensus if this fix is needed. It is needed for the current MC PDHD production, however, current simulations might not need it. We would need someone to test if the PhotonBacktracker default configuration worked alright with the latest dunesw. And we need to decide how to implement the fix for the former production only.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants