Open
Conversation
PetrilloAtWork
approved these changes
Feb 12, 2026
Member
PetrilloAtWork
left a comment
PetrilloAtWork
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Technically it is ok.
Practically, this has potentially implications in track-based analyses, and since it's a experiment-wide change the decision should be led by the analysis conveners.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR simply disables the
UseTimeRangeoption in the TPC-PMT barycenter-based matching.The
UseTimeRangeoption uses a slice's extent along the drift direction to constrain the time range for matching optical flashes, reducing the amount of candidate flashes. This time range is especially tight when the slice crosses the cathode.While this is straightforward for tracks, it is definitely not for showers, or more generally for slices involving showery particles and deposits crossing the cathode. The code has no way of knowing the nature of the particle crossing the cathode, so the safest bet here is to just disable this option.
I have debugged and discussed this with @cerati and @PetrilloAtWork, and I'm adding them as reviewers. Thanks!