|Message: How to speed up tracking for individual optical photons||Not Logged In (login)|
Click on the Forum title, e.g. on the "Forums by Category" page, to read a sequence of postings to the Forum and its threads all in one page. If you are only interested in one thread or the thread following a specific posting, click the thread or the posting, which takes you to a smaller page, which contains only the part you are interested in and may be easier to navigate.
Messages are "chained" if there are only replies at the first level, i.e. 1/1.html, 1/1/1.html etc. In case of "chained" messages the message number is replaced by the icon and there is no indentation.
Inline: Display the subject line only or also the text of the posting(s); for the choice "All" the "Outline" choices are switched off.
|1||0||1||no text / full text of posting|
|2||1||All||text for level 1 only / text for All postings|
Outline: Choose the depth of the posting thread, successive toggle controls provide increasing detail.
|1||2||1||2 levels / 1 level (original posting)|
|2||3||2||3 levels / 2 levels|
|3||3||All||3 levels / all levels (all postings)|
Below is a question I asked in the "particle" forum. I am posting it here as well to look for guidance. Dear Geanters, I am working on a MC for a detector with large volume of liquid scintillator and PMTs. Apparently, tracking individual optical photons is very time consuming. I wonder if there is a simple modification to G4Scintillation.cc, to only track say 1/N of the photons, while keeping the mean photoelectrons and the energy resolution of the detector unchanged. I thought about one dirty fix in G4Scintillation.cc. One can do something like: MeanTrack = MeanNumberOfPhotons/N; G4double sigma = ResolutionScale * sqrt(MeanTrack)/sqrt(N); NumTrack = G4int(G4RandGauss::shoot(MeanTrack,sigma)+0.5); Then go on with the tracking ... Then in the "digitization" routine, for each track that makes a photoelectron, I assign a random weight Poisson(N), and count the weight as the true number of PE. I am not sure this is an air-tight approach. Would you please share your smarter ideas, if any? Thanks a lot in advance! Regards, Jianglai
|Inline Depth:||Outline Depth:||Add message:|