Detector simulation and Geant4 A. Dell’Acqua, CERN EP-ATC

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Trick-or-Vote 2006 Canvass Training. WALKING & KNOCKING for DEMOCRACY! We will be knocking on doors to get out the vote. Its the best way, on the best.
Advertisements

Setting Goals The difference between a goal and a dream is the written word. -Gene Donohue.
5 Why’s Overview.
1 CS101 Introduction to Computing Lecture 17 Algorithms II.
Multiplication Staff Tutorial. In this tutorial we run through some of the basic ideas and tricks in multiplying whole numbers. We do a bit of stuttering.
The Perfect Job Written and Presented by: Seikou Triangle.
TECHNOLOGY IN THE NEW ZEALAND CURRICULUM 2007 What does it all mean? 1.
Career Path Goals; How to Develop them
Polya’s Four Step Problem Solving Process
1Calice-UK Cambridge 9/9/05D.R. Ward David Ward Compare Feb’05 DESY data with Geant4 and Geant3 Monte Carlos. Work in progress – no definitive conclusions.
March 31, Status of the TOF, Ckov and Virtual Detector Packages in G4Mice Steve Kahn Brookhaven National Laboratory Mice Collaboration Meeting March.
Software Parallel Intro 1M.Ellis - CM23 - Harbin - 15th January 2009  Focus this CM continues to be on needs for analysis of data and use of G4MICE online.
CS503: Tenth Lecture, Fall 2008 Review Michael Barnathan.
Complexity (Running Time)
1 Psych 5500/6500 The t Test for a Single Group Mean (Part 5): Outliers Fall, 2008.
» Teaching an online class, what takes up most of your time?
17-19 Oct, 2007Geant4 Japan Oct, 2007Geant4 Japan Oct, 2007Geant4 Japan 2007 Geant4 Japan.
What can a good teacher do with a computer? (or 2 or 3)
From Olivier to commissioning team plans for the start-up of regular operations of LHCb 30/06 to 4/07 : Global commissioning week, all detectors, full.
Chapter 8: Problem Solving
Process Design (Requirements). Recall the Four Steps of Problem Solving * Orient Plan Execute Test These apply to any kind of problem, not just spreadsheet.
ALCPG October 25 th 2007 Hans Wenzel Calorimetry in slic How-to Motivation for dual readout Calorimeter What are our requirements Why did we choose SLIC.
CS 350 – Software Design An Introduction to Design Patterns – Chapter 5 A proposition behind design patterns is that quality of software systems can be.
Validation and TestEm series Michel Maire for the Standard EM group LAPP (Annecy) July 2006.
Problem Definition Chapter 7. Chapter Objectives Learn: –The 8 steps of experienced problem solvers –How to collect and analyze information and data.
The Creative Problem Solving Pack. The following pages provide separate packs that you can use in the following situations. * Creative problem solving.
0 Status of Shower Parameterisation code in Athena Andrea Dell’Acqua CERN PH-SFT.
Intermediate 2 Software Development Process. Software You should already know that any computer system is made up of hardware and software. The term hardware.
EGEE-II INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE EGEE and gLite are registered trademarks NA2 – Dissemination, Outreach and Communication.
Security Vulnerabilities Linda Cornwall, GridPP15, RAL, 11 th January 2006
G4MICE Status and Plans 1M.Ellis - CM24 - RAL - 31st May 2009  Firstly, a correction to the agenda:  I failed to spot a mistake in the agenda that I.
Welcome to CS61A Disc. 29/47 :D Dickson Tsai OH: Tu, Th 4-5pm 411 Soda Previous stop: None >>> Today: Working effectively in.
Everything you have always wanted to know about the Perfect tenses… …and you probably did, but you forgot.
Critical Thinking Lesson 8
ICS 463, Intro to Human Computer Interaction Design: 5. Design Processes Dan Suthers.
Research Proposal The Alignment between Design, Implementation and Affordances, in Blended and Distance Learning.
Ideas for in-situ calibration for the EMC S.Paganis, K.Loureiro ( Wisconsin ) input from+discussions with T.Carli, F.Djama, G.Unal, D.Zerwas, M.Boonekamp,
Chapter 6 CASE Tools Software Engineering Chapter 6-- CASE TOOLS
Status of ATLAS Liquid Argon Calorimeter Simulations With GEANT4 G. Azuelos , A. Chekhtman , J. Dodd , A. Kiryunin , M. Leltchouk , R. Mazini , G.
The CMS Simulation Software Julia Yarba, Fermilab on behalf of CMS Collaboration 22 m long, 15 m in diameter Over a million geometrical volumes Many complex.
Introduction What is detector simulation? A detector simulation program must provide the possibility of describing accurately an experimental setup (both.
Franco Carbognani, EGO LSC-Virgo Meeting May 2007 Status and Plans LIGO-G Z Software Management.
1ECFA/Vienna 16/11/05D.R. Ward David Ward Compare these test beam data with Geant4 and Geant3 Monte Carlos. CALICE has tested an (incomplete) prototype.
Status of the ATLAS Detector description Stan Bentvelsen Berkeley software week May 2000.
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ahmet Turan ÖZCERİT.  System and Software  System Engineering  Software Engineering  Software Engineering Standards  Software Development.
Bennett Marsh UM CERN REU 2014 Upgrades to the CMS HCAL Run Control System.
Maria Grazia Pia Hands-on exercises Unit 2 Modelling the experimental set-up.
LCG – AA review 1 Simulation LCG/AA review Sept 2006.
HDGeant4 Development Report major hurdles overcome in geometry geometry validation complete particles now tracking in magnetic field remaining milestones.
Proposal for a Global Network for Beam Instrumentation [BIGNET] BI Group Meeting – 08/06/2012 J-J Gras CERN-BE-BI.
Update G4builder issues Talk written almost entirely by Stan Bentvelsen with a few updates from Christopher Lester ATLAS G4 Workshop December 2000 CAMBRIDGE.
1 Giuseppe G. Daquino 26 th January 2005 SoFTware Development for Experiments Group Physics Department, CERN Background radiation studies using Geant4.
1 G4UIRoot Isidro González ALICE ROOT /10/2002.
STAR Simulation. Status and plans V. Perevoztchikov Brookhaven National Laboratory,USA.
Detector SimOOlation activities in ATLAS A.Dell’Acqua CERN-EP/ATC May 19th, 1999.
DSMA 0393/1414 Comments of Students. Co-requisite Model Student Comments Students were given this request on their final examination: Write a statement.
Time to resolve Design Issues 1. Disclamer Due to the engineering meeting last week I have not had time to coordinate this material with Tim or the L3.
Comments on SPI. General remarks Essentially all goals set out in the RTAG report have been achieved. However, the roles defined (Section 9) have not.
A Short Course on Geant4 Simulation Toolkit Introduction
Everything you have always wanted to know about the Perfect tenses… …and you probably did, but you forgot.
Monthly video-conference, 18/12/2003 P.Hristov1 Preparation for physics data challenge'04 P.Hristov Alice monthly off-line video-conference December 18,
Extreme Programming.
Modelling Dr Andy Evans In this lecture we'll look at modelling.
Geometry checking tools
Geant3 All collaborations are using G3 to a certain extent
Chapter 7 –Implementation Issues
Get In Shape With EMS Training. INTRODUCTION Those that are thinking about making a change in their life might have thought about going through with EMS.
A Short Course on Geant4 Simulation Toolkit Introduction
Summary of dE/dx studies in silicon and MS in muon system
Simulation Project Structure and tasks
Presentation transcript:

Detector simulation and Geant4 A. Dell’Acqua, CERN EP-ATC

WG meeting on Dec. 1st Pretty well attended Quite a few interesting talk Most comforting fact: we reached the critical mass –People working on all parts of the Atlas detector –Some people have started from scratch and have reached a honorable level of productivity –we can start envisaging some productive work Lots of problems are emerging (foreseen) Can these problems be solved smoothly (next challenge)?

Current activities People concentrating on geometries, yet Need to start evaluating physics asap (and with the broadest spectrum) –First examples show problems which, although not surprising, are turning out to be quite nasty Training phase almost complete –~100 people went through the course –winding down Chaos frozen, waiting for an architecture to fit into –just providing facilities, when a case arises

Highlights We have seen a complete geometry of the Accordion in G4, for the first time –but we spotted several problems, as well The Detector Description in XML is proceeding well and a tool is available for building a G4 description out of it The muon system has been described at least twice and a complete chain AMDB-G4- MuonBox-Persint has been realized

Geometry Placements work properly –The geometry of the accordion can be realized in this way, at least for test beam simulations –Extremely heavy in terms of memory and initialization time Parameterized volumes are OK, as far as detector geometry is concerned –but disastrous in terms of tracking performance… –1-dimensional voxelization (wrt 2- and 3-dimensional voxelization for Placements) –We can’t live without (but we can’t use them either!)

Geometry (2) Boolean solids –They are great! People fall in love with them… –…but they are an endless source of bugs –…and doing so, they are slow, as well –…and until now we got no graphics for them We have not tried BREPs and other geometrical entities provided by G4, yet The possibility of defining our own solids and get them to work in the simulation as a snap is extremely appealing –Let’s create a G4ZigZag then...

Geometry (3) The answer (for complex geometries) is obviously in combining different techniques. Need to try them, in order to gather expertise –Looking for creative “architects” …but at the same time we need parameterized volumes and boolean solids to be made as performing as possible –High priority to implementing the 2-dimensional voxeling for parameterized volumes –Low priority to G4VolumeAssembly (which is just a way of masking placements in the blue…)

The G4 builder Very nice exercise by Stan –Allows to go from the XML description of a detector to its geometry description in G4 Useful for a rapid implementation of a geometry to be tested/compared against another one For the moment it makes heavy use of boolean solids and it does not implement parameterizations My feeling is that the “ultimate” geometry will still be written by hand, with dirty tricks to gain time –still, we must give the possibility of utilizing the builder

Physics It is clear (see M. Leltchouk’s and D. Barberis’ talks) that we have a problem there It is not always clear which processes to use, when alternative implementations exist It is not clear what is the effect of cutting in stopping range (wrt kinetic energy as in G3) –it is encouraging to see that the mean value of the energy deposited in the LAr does not seem to depend on the cut value, though There seem to be problems with several processes –…and we haven’t started with hadronics, yet

Physics (2) We have to slow down and understand and verify what we are doing Although shooting particles into the Accordion might be fancy, we probably have to step back to simpler geometries (material slabs, simple plate calorimeters) in order to simplify the problem Re-use knowledge and expertise accumulated by G4 developers to sort things out –Mini-workshop on Dec. 9th (2pm) to discuss about processes and cuts, at least for EM physics

Physics (3) We ought to set up a working group composed of “volunteers” who can spend their precious time exploring the G4 dungeons (cfr. M. Nessi, Aachen, 1990) –regular meetings –clear program of work –evaluation of the physics available in G4 –work with G4 to correct bugs –report in N months from now …and concentrate on test beams!

Miscellanea Although there exists some fancy graphic stuff, aimed at improving the look of your presentation, basic utilities to facilitate user’s life when implementing his/her simulation program are far below G3! –I miss DTREE, DCUT, an user interface whose commands can be abbreviated… The user must now implement parts of the simulation which were coming for free with G3 (#1 question I’m asked in the courses: “Is there a list of pre-defined elements and material in Geant4?” )

Installation and distribution Until now, the patch policy (of the lack of it) has been the biggest problem I saw –We have to maintain our own version –We have to check out new versions as they become available –We have to build the libraries I still can’t see why should we act as librarians for Geant4! The G4 CVS repository should be made public (read only) I can’t see any improvement with the revised policy

Where should we go from here? Evaluation of the physics currently in Geant4 is the keystone for the success of this simulation –we need people willing to run a simulation program and understand the results Test beams are the next challenge –no need to worry about geometrical implications –a good agreement between data and simulation must be achieved before we can even think of collecting things into an Atlas simulation program Collaboration with the Geant4 group is fundamental and needed