Print

Print
Looks good with the observation that we miss an overview GENIE talk to put everything in context, mention activities that have no dedicated talks, outline future plans etc.
We could ask for that overview talk, and then merge some of the talks below - If we get a 30 minute slot (at least), it is not impossible to think that all 1,2 and 4 can be combined together into a single talk about our “new comprehensive GENIE models, model characterisation and tunes.”

About your questions:

1 and 2 are quite different - 1 is what Júlia has been discussing in the past few weeks. 2 can be a more generic discussion about the construction of our comprehensive models and a summary of our quantitative comparisons against all data.

3 is not Shivesh’s work (which is the outstanding refactorization fir the technical interface with Pythia8). Talk 3 refers to a Professor-style fit of the GENIE hadronization model (and using the result of that fit to get a handle on corresponding systematics). In KNO/Pythia6, why not - was not done before and we have no GENIE estimates of uncertainties. We could also try a KNO/Pythia8 combination (running the fit does not require the refactorization that is needed for the release of GENIE/Pythia8 interface -could be done using a hacked version as we will not have to maintain it past NuInt). I also have Herwig in mind as an alternative to Pythia. This would be the output of the hadronization_data_fit and comparisons_hadronization_upgrade incubator projects. I am not sure what Shivesh’s tuning plans are - this is the first time I heard about it, so...

cheers
Costas



-- 
Dr. Costas Andreopoulos
Associate Professor
University of Liverpool  & STFC / RAL

Sent from my iPhone
On 14 Jun 2018, at 19:32, Gabriel Nathan Perdue <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Hi all,

This is the list I am about to propose to NuInt:

1 - Pion production model fits to free-nucleon/deuterium data
2 - Quantitative characterisation of comprehensive neutrino interaction models
3 - New hadronization model tunes and evaluations of model uncertainty
4 - Global fits of neutrino-nucleus data
5 - New GENIE FSI models

Reviewing it and thinking about questions I'm likely to receive, I have a pre-emptive question and an observation/question:

1. what is the difference between talks #1 and #2?
2. is #3 referring to our plans to upgrade Pythia? we aren't planing on tuning Pythia 6, are we? Shivesh has an NPC fellowship to come to Fermilab this Autumn to work on finishing the Pythia 8 upgrade and participate in tuning it. But that is sort of incompatible with a NuInt schedule, so Im not sure what that talk is really meant to cover.


Gabriel Perdue
Associate Scientist

Scientific Computing Division
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
PO Box 500, MS 234, Batavia, IL 60510, USA
Office: 630-840-6499
Cell: 630-605-8062

Connect with us!

On Jun 12, 2018, at 2:50 PM, Gabriel Nathan Perdue <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Hi all,

Can we not let go of this? Should I just go ahead and propose this slate of talks to the NuInt program committee and see where it goes?

pax
gp

On Jun 4, 2018, at 9:22 AM, Gabriel Nathan Perdue <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Can we compile a running list as we go? And, importantly, can people offer opinions on the best strategy for pitching the slate of talks? The schedule is a free for all this year, so I suspect we will have to fight for slots. Also, I suspect being early will be valuable.

The running list...

1 - Pion production model fits to free-nucleon/deuterium data
2 - Quantitative characterisation of comprehensive neutrino interaction models
3 - New hadronization model tunes and evaluation of model uncertainty
4- Global fits of neutrino-nucleus data
5- New GENIE FSI

As for making GENIE-specific talks and then a cluster of general talks with links to generators, I could imagine a grouping like this:

```
GENIE
---------
2 - Quantitative characterisation of comprehensive neutrino interaction models
3 - New hadronization model tunes and evaluation of model uncertainty
5- New GENIE FSI

General with GENIE links
----------------------------------
1 - Pion production model fits to free-nucleon/deuterium data
4- Global fits of neutrino-nucleus data
```

The fitting work could be regarded as very general. Although the work definitely uses GENIE code at a deep level all over the place, you could present that work as a study of tensions in datasets, etc.


Gabriel Perdue

On Jun 4, 2018, at 9:15 AM, Steven Dytman <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

I was on organizing comm for a few years. Back then, there was a generator section
and room for 4-5 talks. Sounds like organization is more open now, good. In addition,
seems generator work is more integrated.

Costas' list seems good but I'd add all the work we've done on FSI. By then, we should
have new hN, GEANT, and INCL++ integrated. (Marc is working on validation plots.)
This seems worth a talk.

There is also more interest in general issues such as nuclear models, links to oscillation....
I like the idea of pitching ~2 GENIE specific talks and a cluster of more general talks
that have strong links to generators.

Steve

On 06/03/2018 06:12 PM, Gabriel Nathan Perdue wrote:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite" class="">Costas - I like the thinking here, but have a question about "branding". How would you propose pitching this slate of talks to the NuInt program committee. Generally, theorists get to talk about whatever they want, but only get one talk to do (sometimes two, but sort of rarely). Experiments get invited to present a bunch of things. Generator groups are sort of in between...

I'm not sure how to pitch this slate of talks w/o calling them all GENIE talks. On the other hand, maybe that is okay? If we have a sharp list of things we want to cover, why not just advocate for that list under a GENIE umbrella and try to break the idea of just one talk per generator? Honestly, I think that was a historical consequence of laziness and poor communication across the community. I think if we very clearly have 3 or 4 (or 5) talks worth of material spread across the collaboration, there's nothing stopping us from having that many talks.

Anyway, I like the idea, but need help thinking about how to sell it.

Gabriel Perdue

On Jun 3, 2018, at 5:03 PM, Costas Andreopoulos - UKRI STFC <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Not all our talks need to carry an explicit GENIE label. Ultimately, I feel this limits the number of talks we can give because there will always be some (low) quota for generator groups. But there is no reason why, for example, Teppei can give a talk on (GENIE) hadronization and Callum can give a talk on bubble chamber data fits (incl GENIE), but GENIE authors working on the same topics must squeeze a couple of slides in the GENIE summary talk or must compete against each other for a limited number of “GENIE” talks. I think we should have a single GENIE summary talk, as always. Then we can try to promote a number of other talks focussing on specific phenomenology / tuning work (this work may be implemented in GENIE, but this is not the main feature - indeed, the emphasis should be on the phenomenology, not GENIE).

The following are possible talks I know about from STWG work (there may be others from NPWG, PPWG developments). 1 and 2 is mature enough work. 3 will be developed over the summer and I believe it should be mature enough by NuInt. 4 will is partially developed and may or may not be something we can present by NuInt.

1 - Pion production model fits to free-nucleon/deuterium data
2 - Quantitative characterisation of comprehensive neutrino interaction models
3 - New hadronization model tunes and evaluation of model uncertainty
4- Global fits of neutrino-nucleus data


cheers
C

--
Dr. Costas Andreopoulos
Associate Professor
University of Liverpool & STFC / RAL
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__costas.andreopoulos.eu&d=DwIGaQ&c=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA&r=VuX71VzHBLywwZNXKJh6xw&m=aQpYMFcEAlzfJJXT5xOZMxzbajfpiAeHroKkS583gT0&s=k4bUwJy-WtoSTfWSXQuc_N974VxbdkKZTM78P-eFG40&e=

Sent from my iPhone

On 3 Jun 2018, at 19:45, Gabriel Nathan Perdue <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:

Hi all,

I am on the NuInt 2018 scientific program committee this year, and we're doing things a bit different. Instead of organizing into groups (0pi, DIS, etc.), all the organizers are one big committee working on the whole program. May or may not work, but here's to experimenters, eh?

At any rate, how many presentations would GENIE like at NuFact, and on what topics? I, of course, can't promise we'll get everything, but if I can take a decent estimate to the rest of the committee and say "this is what GENIE would like to cover," it makes a good starting point. Obviously, we'd like at least one talk on the tuning efforts, but is there something else we'd like to highlight (e.g., some technical/physics model development)? Would one talk be enough for us? Do we need two tuning talks (e.g., free nucleon, nuclear targets)?

To unsubscribe from the NEUTRINO-MC-CORE list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=NEUTRINO-MC-CORE&A=1



Gabriel Perdue
Associate Scientist

Scientific Computing Division
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
PO Box 500, MS 234, Batavia, IL 60510, USA
Office: 630-840-6499
Cell: 630-605-8062

Connect with us!



To unsubscribe from the NEUTRINO-MC-CORE list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=NEUTRINO-MC-CORE&A=1



To unsubscribe from the NEUTRINO-MC-CORE list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=NEUTRINO-MC-CORE&A=1

--
Dr. Costas Andreopoulos | Assoc. Professor
University of Liverpool & STFC/RAL
http://costas.andreopoulos.eu

To unsubscribe from the NEUTRINO-MC-CORE list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=NEUTRINO-MC-CORE&A=1