|Message: validation of G4NeutronHP||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)|
To G4NeutronHP developers:
I recently read some slides from https://indico.fnal.gov/getFile.py/access?contribId=125&sessionId=7&resId=0&materialId=slides&confId=4535
and found there the geant4 simulations results were compared with MCNPX results.
I am wondering why we always use mcnp results as references for neutron simulations?
Is it because that MCNP is benchmarked for neutron problems? all energies? any reference paper or reports?
Thanks and regards!