Difference between revisions of "AIOP May 20, 2024"

From epsciwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
Line 67: Line 67:
 
=== Minutes ===
 
=== Minutes ===
 
<!-- Attendees: David L., Thomas B., Torri J., Patrick M., Jiawei G., Naomi J., Malachi S., Armen K. -->
 
<!-- Attendees: David L., Thomas B., Torri J., Patrick M., Jiawei G., Naomi J., Malachi S., Armen K. -->
 +
<ul>
 +
    <li>5-20-24</li>
 +
    <li>Attendees: David, Thomas, Torri, Hovanes, Jiawei, Armen, Cristiano, Patrick, Naomi</li>
 +
    <ul>
 +
        <li>Review of Minutes from last meeting</li>
 +
        <ul>
 +
            <li>Thorough review was had</li>
 +
        </ul>
 +
        <li>Announcements:</li>
 +
        <ul>
 +
            <li>There is a workshop at jlab on polarization. We should attend</li>
 +
        </ul>
 +
        <li>Project Progress</li>
 +
        <ul>
 +
            <li>data-mining/prep</li>
 +
            <ul>
 +
                <li>Jiawei: not much to report due to GlueX collab meeting</li>
 +
                <li>Patrick</li>
 +
                <ul>
 +
                    <li>Have identified more discrepancies</li>
 +
                    <li>Need to remove Perp/para change based nudges</li>
 +
                    <li>Beam current on req from 30s to Jiawei’s 10s</li>
 +
                    <li>Showed a slide showing the difference in 1 vs 2 nudge counts</li>
 +
                    <li>David questioned the number of button clicks</li>
 +
                    <ul>
 +
                        <li>Looks like a nudge event may be many clicks waiting for system responses</li>
 +
                        <li>Hovanes agrees</li>
 +
                        <li>Naomi: how many &gt; = &gt;&gt;</li>
 +
                        <ul>
 +
                            <li>Hovanes: 10</li>
 +
                        </ul>
 +
                    </ul>
 +
                    <li>We think it should be 1 event not 2. Jiawei thinks he can combine them</li>
 +
                    <li>Do we have the rate of nudges?</li>
 +
                    <ul>
 +
                        <li>Patrick: no, not yet</li>
 +
                    </ul>
 +
                    <li>David: we need to have a nominal coherent edge to measure drift</li>
 +
                    <ul>
 +
                        <li>Naomi: will look (https://halldweb.jlab.org/hdops/wiki/index.php/Standard_Production_Running_Conditions)</li>
 +
                    </ul>
 +
                    <li>Hovanes: some PERP-&gt;PARA-&gt;PERP (vice versa) probably contain valid nudge events</li>
 +
                    <ul>
 +
                        <li>Patrick: being cut out…will go back and look</li>
 +
                    </ul>
 +
                    <li>~8% of nudges are when the beam is down. What do we do with them?</li>
 +
                    <ul>
 +
                        <li>Thomas thinks the case shown indicates the nudge condition was met and the button press happened when beam was away “unintentionally”</li>
 +
                        <li>Will try to reclaim with simple filters</li>
 +
                        <li>Beam conditions change from before to after nudge</li>
 +
                        <ul>
 +
                            <li>Naomi: small number get rid of them</li>
 +
                        </ul>
 +
                    </ul>
 +
                    <li>New definition! Nudge sequence = multiple nudges. A nudge is a button press</li>
 +
                    <ul>
 +
                        <li>Hovanes: look at active collimator too</li>
 +
                    </ul>
 +
                    <li>Example of beam pos change with an event</li>
 +
                    <li>More discussion as to the definition of the start/end of a nudge sequence</li>
 +
                    <li>Discussion of definitions of event start/end as it relates to the “training data”</li>
 +
                </ul>
 +
            </ul>
 +
        </ul>
 +
    </ul>
 +
</ul>
  
  
 
==== Action Items ====
 
==== Action Items ====

Latest revision as of 13:03, 3 June 2024

The current weekly meeting time is every other Monday at 13:00 US/Eastern

Connection Info:

You can connect using ZOOM Video conferencing (ID: 161 588 8669). (Click "Expand" to the right for details -->):

One tap mobile: US: +16692545252,,1602484178# or +16468287666,,1602484178#

Meeting URL: https://jlab-org.zoomgov.com/j/1615888669?pwd=MnhGVUhpeEd3NVpnTGxoZHJManNBdz09&from=addon
Meeting ID: 161 588 8669
Passcode: 561441

Join by Telephone
For higher quality, dial a number based on your current location.
Dial: +1 669 254 5252 US (San Jose)
+1 646 828 7666 US (New York)
+1 646 964 1167 US (US Spanish Line)
+1 551 285 1373 US (New Jersey)
+1 669 216 1590 US (San Jose)
+1 415 449 4000 US (US Spanish Line)
833 568 8864 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 161 588 8669
International numbers
Join from an H.323/SIP room system
H.323: 161.199.138.10 (US West)
161.199.136.10 (US East)
Meeting ID: 161 588 8669
Passcode: 561441

SIP: 1615888669@sip.zoomgov.com
Passcode: 561441

One tap mobile: US: +16692545252,,1601987443# or +16468287666,,1601987443#

Meeting URL: https://jlab-org.zoomgov.com/j/1615888669?pwd=MnhGVUhpeEd3NVpnTGxoZHJManNBdz09&from=addon
Meeting ID: 161 588 8669
Passcode: 561441

AIOP - Polarized Photon Source

Agenda:

  1. Previous Meeting
  2. Announcements
  3. Project Progress
  4. PIER Activities
  5. AOT


Minutes

  • 5-20-24
  • Attendees: David, Thomas, Torri, Hovanes, Jiawei, Armen, Cristiano, Patrick, Naomi
    • Review of Minutes from last meeting
      • Thorough review was had
    • Announcements:
      • There is a workshop at jlab on polarization. We should attend
    • Project Progress
      • data-mining/prep
        • Jiawei: not much to report due to GlueX collab meeting
        • Patrick
          • Have identified more discrepancies
          • Need to remove Perp/para change based nudges
          • Beam current on req from 30s to Jiawei’s 10s
          • Showed a slide showing the difference in 1 vs 2 nudge counts
          • David questioned the number of button clicks
            • Looks like a nudge event may be many clicks waiting for system responses
            • Hovanes agrees
            • Naomi: how many > = >>
              • Hovanes: 10
          • We think it should be 1 event not 2. Jiawei thinks he can combine them
          • Do we have the rate of nudges?
            • Patrick: no, not yet
          • David: we need to have a nominal coherent edge to measure drift
          • Hovanes: some PERP->PARA->PERP (vice versa) probably contain valid nudge events
            • Patrick: being cut out…will go back and look
          • ~8% of nudges are when the beam is down. What do we do with them?
            • Thomas thinks the case shown indicates the nudge condition was met and the button press happened when beam was away “unintentionally”
            • Will try to reclaim with simple filters
            • Beam conditions change from before to after nudge
              • Naomi: small number get rid of them
          • New definition! Nudge sequence = multiple nudges. A nudge is a button press
            • Hovanes: look at active collimator too
          • Example of beam pos change with an event
          • More discussion as to the definition of the start/end of a nudge sequence
          • Discussion of definitions of event start/end as it relates to the “training data”


Action Items