|Message: PAI model versus QGSP_BIC_EMY||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)|
I'm doing a simulation of energy loss of mono-energetic protons (energy 20-36 MeV) in 300 um thick silicon box that is placed in vacuum. To get the deposited energy I use QGSP_BIC_EMY, QBBC and PAI physics lists. When I compare the mean energy deposit from these models for given proton energy I see that pai model result is systematically below QBBC and QGSP_BIC_EMY, see
The step size in Silicone is limited to 30 um for QBBC and QGSP_BIC_EMY. Could you tell me what should be changed in the settings of pai model in order to make it compatible with QBBC and QGSP_BIC_EMY? Pai model that I use was adapted from the example TestEm8. Thanks in advance for your answer. Best regards Filip
|Inline Depth:||Outline Depth:||Add message:|