just realized that you included some of the info I requested in my email
earlier in this note.
TOF clibrations: tofcal1792.zro
TOF Pedestals: tofpeds3025.dat
TimeWalk: toftw_1792_3025.fit
in /home/ficenec/
Timewalk is also in /home/manak/public_html/packages/utilities/sc_map/
-----------------------------------------------
The TOF tdc calibrations tofcal1792.zro seems to have the format:
Sector Paddle_id TDCL_0 TDCL_1 TDCL_2 TDCR_0 TDCR_1 TDCR_2
where TDC_L_Corr = TDCL_0 + TDCL_1*(tdcl) + TDCL_2*(tdcl)^2
Yes ?
Where are the errors/uncertainties ? Or are these values VERY accurate ?
------------------------------------------------
Tofpeds*.dat seems like an idiotic format. I would prefer the
sparsification file format over this. I think the format should be:
Sector Paddle_id Pedestal_L Delta_Pedestal_L Pedestal_R Delta_Pedestal_R
--------------------------------------------------
Time walk:
Sector Paddle_id P_l(0) P_l(1) P_l(2) P_r(0) P_r(2) P_r(3)
> The parameterization [P(1) + P(2)/(ADC-PED)**P(3)] ?
> [P(1) + P(2)*log(ADC-PED) + P(3)/sqrt(ADC-PED)] ?
Where are the uncertainties on these quantities ? I don't beleive these
could be all that accurate.
-------------------------------------------------
I have a problem with any file format that does not allow for comments.
All files should have a text header indicating which data was used to
create the file, what the parameters in the table are, and which formula
should be used to use these parameters. Anybody who can't deal with
comments in a file, come talk to me and I'll help you with your parser
problems. I suggest that all comments are preceded by an "!" mark, and
that all text after the ! is ignored by the parser.
For the "kumac" fans, we could agree that comments should only occur in
the header, i.e. the first x lines.
We really need to clean up things like this if we want our work to be
usefull for other people !
Best Regards,
Maurik Holtrop