Software Summary Database Data Flow G4MICE Status & Plans Detector Reconstruction 1M.Ellis - CM24 - 3rd June 2009

Database  Storage of the geometry is progressing well.  Numerous geometries have been stored to the DB and then retrieved.  Work is moving to calibrations and then cabling information now.  API exists now at RAL.  Discussion during the session concluded that the best solution is for the API to be on the MICE network (in the control room) and a process can run on heplnw17 to forward requests from outside of the lab.  This way a network failure will not prevent data taking. 2M.Ellis - CM24 - 3rd June 2009

API  Communication with the API is through the use of XML files.  G4MICE already has an application that takes the geometry and generates an XML file.  The API converts this to SQL (which decouples G4MICE, the DAQ, and other users from any changes to the DB including the technology in use).  Will soon write code to read an XML file into G4MICE to use a geometry retrieved from the DB.  Queries to the DB will be possible through a web interface and through a GUI in the control room. 3M.Ellis - CM24 - 3rd June 2009

Data Flow  Long discussion during the plenary presentation yesterday.  Key points: u Henry’s talk u MICE Notes 247 and 253: 4M.Ellis - CM24 - 3rd June 2009

We Need to Turn this: 5M.Ellis - CM24 - 3rd June 2009

Into This: 6M.Ellis - CM24 - 3rd June 2009

“Known Unknowns”  Meta-data: u First list of potential search terms. u What technology/DB to use?  LFC namespace: u Proposed at last CM. u Need to agree (or disagree!) to it now so that we can start registering data to the GRID.  MICE Data: u Volume u Lifetime u Access control  Proposed to arrange a 1 day workshop for interested / key people to settle these points. 7M.Ellis - CM24 - 3rd June 2009

G4MICE Status & Plans  G4MICE was released on the weekend.  It is the first release with the new compiler and external libraries: u gcc u GEANT4 9.1.p01 u CLHEP u ROOT u GSL 1.12 u Unpacking 2.0 u RecPack  It compiles without warnings on 32 bit and 64 bit machines and this will be enforced for all future releases. 8M.Ellis - CM24 - 3rd June 2009

Tests  We currently have: u Unit Tests: 81 u System Tests: 55 u Integration Tests: 0 (several written, but none yet added to testing script).  In total, the testing is currently checking over 13,000 simulated, digitised, reconstructed values or other output from various parts of G4MICE.  Still need Unit Tests for the RealData domain. Will work on these over the summer.  Need to add System/Integration tests for the common use cases.  Please let me know how YOU use G4MICE so I can add some tests to ensure that what you do continues to work the way you need it to. 9M.Ellis - CM24 - 3rd June 2009

Detector Reconstruction  Tracker reconstruction has been improved as a result of Aron’s analysis of the KEK data and the ongoing cosmic ray tests in lab 7.  Two areas to be improved before the next production release: u Remove hard coded tracker number in SciFiDigit class. u Fix automatic choice of PR algorithm based on the magnetic field in each tracker.  TOF reconstruction is well advanced (see reports on work by Mark, Yordan and Vassil).  CKOV reconstruction is also coming along nicely (David Adey and Vassil). 10M.Ellis - CM24 - 3rd June 2009

Next Steps  Add tests for the FileSplitter and FileMerger Applications.  Ensure all Recon Unit tests are working correctly and increase the scope to cover cosmic ray as well as MICE physics cases.  Generate release with all of the above for installation on the GRID.  In parallel with the above: u Produce a 64-bit version of the compiler and external libraries for installation on 64 bit machines. u Produce a Mac version of G4MICE (growing demand). 11M.Ellis - CM24 - 3rd June 2009

Concerns  As mentioned at a past VC, I am still concerned about the lack of direction given to those working on the code for the PID detectors.  Both Mark and Yordan have been working on the TOF, and I fear this has resulted in wasted/duplicated effort.  There would appear to be a similar potential in the CKOV with Vassil and David.  I would hate to think that important tasks (e.g. implementing the actual MICE hall geometry in the software) is suffering due to lack of mouse-power while effective mice are duplicating the work of others. 12M.Ellis - CM24 - 3rd June 2009

Activities that need an Owner  There are a number of key areas for which someone needs to take “ownership”: u MICE hall geometry (I am starting on this with Ash Jamdagni and the help of people at RAL, but this will not move very quickly). u Production – this was discussed during Henry’s talk yesterday, someone (or a group) needs to take charge of the eventual offline reconstruction of our data (we already have lots to practice on!). u PID related software – unlike the tracker group, there still does not appear to be any clear leadership for the other detectors (with the possible exception of the EMR). 13M.Ellis - CM24 - 3rd June 2009

Any Volunteers? 14M.Ellis - CM24 - 3rd June 2009