[Rivet] DIS issues with Rivet

[Roman Kogler]

Hi Andy,

thanks for following up on that. You are right - the concerns from 
Thomas and Simon overlap with my previous emails. In fact, I think we 
are going to work together with implementing and testing some DIS analyses.

I have a few patches for the DIS case, how should I send them to you? 
Would you like me to implement them directly or should I just send you 
some code snippets that you or one of the Rivet team has to implement? 
In fact, how are you validating changes and new developments in Rivet? 
Do you have a standard validation procedure? I'm asking because one of 
the changes concerns the recombination scheme of the jet finder. In DIS 
we use the pt-recombination scheme which gives different results than 
the LHC-standard fourvector recombination (E-scheme). Here I would 
propose to take the jet four-vector directly from FastJet instead of 
recalculating it in Rivet, as is done at the moment. To test these 
changes it would be good to run some sort of validation and make sure 
that for the Tevatron or LHC jet analysis nothing changed.

Otherwise, it would be great if the fixes for the DIS case could go into 
a public release soon. This will make it much easier for us to implement 
some analyses.

Cheers,
    Roman




On 8/7/12 18:13, Andy Buckley wrote:
> On 07/08/12 17:01, Simon Plätzer wrote:
>> Hi Andy,
>>
>> some time ago Thomas and colleagues asked about few issues related to
>> DIS analyses in Rivet. We really want to look at these/use the provided
>> features to implement other DIS observables; have you had time to look
>> into this stuff?
> Hi Simon,
>
> I'm replying with the Rivet mailing list in CC, since I think no-one has
> the capacity to be 100% in charge of Rivet development at the moment
> (roll on yet another attempt at EU funding...)
>
> I spoke with Roman (also in CC now) at the BOOST workshop about some
> improvements to the DIS treatment, and confirmed there that while *I*
> don't have time to implement them, we will ecstatically receive,
> integrate and credit any patches that you, Thomas or Roman should
> supply! DIS isn't an event type that many people are testing right now,
> so if you guys have the interest then I think you are the best possible
> critics and improvers (I don't want to say "maintainers" -- it implies
> drudgery!)
>
> I don't recall if Thomas and Roman's concerns/suggestions overlap,
> although I guess all you guys are in (actual, same-institute type)
> contact? The main development thread in Rivet at the moment is the big
> histogramming (and other things) overhaul, which I hope will be ready
> for a first release in a couple of months -- faster seems too
> optimistic. But we have a maintenance branch and can consider a 1.8.2
> release in the next month or so if there is enough development to
> warrant it.
>
> Thanks,
> Andy
>