> Therefor, for acceptance studies I would just turn off all the non-detector
> geometry, i.e.-
>
> NOGEOM 'FOIL' 'TORU' 'MINI' 'PTG'
Would it not be better to use the 'NOSEC' switch instead of the 'NOGEOM'.
With the NOGEOM switch, particles that would under normal circumstances
dissappear in the coils etc, will now just go their merry way. NOSEC speeds
things up a lot by avoiding showers, but will stop propagating those
particles that would otherwise have showered.
Maybe fiducial cuts do the same thing, but we also need to study where
exactly these cuts should go etc.
>
> At this point GSIM will be dominated by the EC showers. One possibility
> is to turn off the EC geometry as well and use the ECHITS bank which
> records the particle hits on a plane just in front of the EC module.
> Normally these banks are turned off with the card:
>
> NOMC 'EC' 'SC' 'CC' 'DC'
>
> All we really need to know is whether the electron entered the fiducial
> area. We can use the MCTK momentum and fudge the energy resolution and
> trigger threshold later.
I have had the same idea, and tried to see if it made sense to have Dave
Tedeschi, who will be writing the shower library code, implement something
like this. My suggestion was to have a GSIM 'ultra-fast' mode where the EC
is essentially turned of and the EC banks are not written out. Instead a
final results bank would be written out, and RECSIS would recognise that
since this bank is already there, it doesn't need to make it again from the
EC bank.
Several people have told me that this is difficult to do. I agree it would
be difficult is you try to fill a bank such as ECRB or ECHB, which contains
a lot of detailed information. However, how diffcult would it be to fill
ECPB ? Which all we would really need for the acceptance studies. Or am I
wrong in over-simplifuing the EC this much ?
-- Maurik