[Rivet] Rivet 2.5.0 beta approaching, and more Rivet analyses?

[Andy Buckley]

Hi Xavier, Chris, and Alex,

I just wanted to let you know the near-future plans for Rivet. The next 
major version will be 2.5.0, in which the major developments are (at 
last!) a move to compulsory C++11 and dropping of the Boost library 
dependency, and adding some machinery to include detector effects.

The first of these will be welcome, I hope: we took the arrival of 
experiment-contributed analyses in the C++11 dialect as a clear sign 
that it was finally time to make that move. And it really cleans up the 
code when used judiciously. It's nice to finally get rid of Boost, too!

We hope that the second development will make your BSM groups happy. As 
you know, we have long rejected calls for detector-sim integration, on 
the grounds that SM measurement is *definitely* best provided in 
unfolded form. But for BSM purposes this is unrealistic, so hopefully 
the arrival of particle and jet efficiency/smearing tools (both standard 
functions and pluggability of user-defined ones) will pave the way for 
Rivet analysis preservation (and re-casting) from those groups as well 
as the established Standard Model uses.

I was particularly happy to find that Rivet's projection model suits 
fast-simulation very well: analyses can apply the exactly appropriate 
smearing functions rather than relying on one-size-fits-all objects from 
monolithic fast-sims, and if the same definition is used more than once, 
projection caching automatically kicks it to avoid wasting CPU. We'll 
have plenty more to say about this...

We'll provide a 2.5.0 beta for you to test in the near future, but in 
the meantime I wanted to let you know what is coming... so you can pass 
the message on to those who might be interested. And to ask if you have 
any more imminent analyses in the pipeline? We can issue a 2.4.2 release 
before the final 2.5.0 if there is demand, but at present there's only 
one analysis in our integration queue so we'd be tempted to go straight 
to 2.5 if no more are on their way. And there's another plus point for 
that strategy: going straight to 2.5 allows you to use C++11 features! 
Let us know, please.

Best wishes,
Andy

-- 
Dr Andy Buckley, Lecturer / Royal Society University Research Fellow
Particle Physics Expt Group, University of Glasgow