Open Tasks
Needs Triage (5)
- T222 Investigate the use of JSON schema in view of introducing and eventually migrating to JSON dec files
- Restricted Project
- Jul 10 2023, 6:20 PM
- Restricted Project
- Jun 6 2023, 5:17 PM
- Restricted Project
- Jun 8 2021, 2:55 PM
High (1)
- Aug 11 2023, 10:04 AM
Assigned: tlatham
Normal (9)
- Jul 21 2022, 11:04 AM
Assigned: tlatham
Active Repositories
- rWHIZARDSVN whizardsvn
- Fri, Sep 22, 9:14 PM2023-09-22 21:14:12 (UTC+1)
- Subversion
- rEVTGEN evtgen
- Tue, Sep 5, 9:40 AM2023-09-05 09:40:18 (UTC+1)
- Git
- rHERWIGBOOTHG herwigboothg
- 270 Commits
- ·
- Restricted Project
- Aug 17 2023, 10:46 AM2023-08-17 10:46:48 (UTC+1)
- Mercurial
- View All Results
Recent Activity
Yesterday
Wed, Sep 20
Thu, Aug 31
- Avoid printout at every step in the scan to find probmax. Print info only at the end of the scan.
Wed, Aug 30
ok great, then this can go in, along with D94, I'll take care of landing them both tomorrow
This all looks fine and as I would expect.
Tue, Aug 29
Great, many thanks!
It appears I somehow checked out a local commit that was not supposed to end up in the revision. Now I reverted it. The diff from the initial DR to now shows only the comment in EvtDDalitz.cpp https://phab.hepforge.org/D94?vs=402&id=413#toc as it should be.
- Reverted local changes that were not meant to be published
No, they were not... I updated the differential revision from a different computer, so perhaps the local branches were not synced or correctly copied for some reason. Let me make another revision.
Thanks for adding the comment @lmassa. However, it looks like some other things have changed as well. See:
https://phab.hepforge.org/D94?vs=402&id=412#toc
Are those additional changes intentional?
Mon, Aug 28
Thank you @tlatham for reviewing the distributions, it is a really helpful cross-check.
- Added comment documenting the change
Aug 24 2023
Code looks good.
Aug 23 2023
Many thanks for this @abudinen. After the reviews by @jback and me on the CERN gitlab MR evtgen/evtgen!4, I think this is ready to go, unless @jback has any further comments, or @kreps would like to comment?
- Changed names of some variables to make it consistent with model name.
It might be a good idea to add a comment in the code that the amplitude magnitudes are obtained from the mentioned BaBar paper but corrected for normalisation.
I also checked that the numbers are consistent with the ones from the presentation. It might be a good idea to add a comment in the code that the amplitude magnitudes are obtained from the mentioned BaBar paper but corrected for normalisation.
The plots look good, e.g. the m_ij^2 projections as per your slide 19:
Many thanks for this @lmassa and apologies for the delay in looking at it.
Aug 22 2023
- Updated History file.