-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 41
Description
There are a few inconsistencies in the datatypes that were introduced in #179 for the drift chamber study. A tangential but related discussion is also in #322. Opening this issue as a sort of summary discussion board to see if this situation can be improved, also keeping in mind the proposed new datatypes in #299
My main complaints for these are:
-
HitLevelData
is a rather generic lwo level datatype to store pretty much any detector hit / readout. However, it has a few members that make it very gaseous detector specific. I think this should be reflected in the name
Lines 239 to 244 in bd9f450
edm4hep::HitLevelData: Members: - uint64_t cellID // cell id - uint32_t N // number of reconstructed ionization cluster - float eDep [GeV] // reconstructed energy deposit - float pathLength [mm] // track path length -
Hypothesis
is not properly documented and seems to be lacking andf
field(?). Specifically it has achi2
value, but it's not really documented what thischi2
value represents. Also thesigma
docstring could be refined.
Lines 232 to 236 in bd9f450
edm4hep::Hypothesis: Members: - float chi2 // chi2 - float expected // expected value - float sigma // sigma value -
Overall the structure of the dataypes is fairly involved, but also quite separate from the rest of EDM4hep and I am wondering whether there is a way to (re-)organize the information in a cleaner way in order to make them better integrated into the rest of EDM4hep. Relation diagram of the datatypes and some EDM4hep datatypes: