[Gate-users] Some news about the strange behaviour

[Simon Stute]

Hi MJ,

2007/12/21, Park MinJae <MJ at toti.us>:
>
>
> Dear Simon,
>
> First of all, I like... Dig, dig, dig and dig more...^^
>
> Ok...throw this out over the window...^^
>
> I already did post about my system...at Dec 19 as following:


Sorry ...

========================
> CLHEP 1.9.3.1
> ROOT 5.14
> GEANT4 9.0.p01
> GATE 3.1.2
> are installed on my Kubuntu box...
> ========================
> Let's dig in more...
> I am using [EMLOW 4.3, NDL 3.11, PhotonEvaporation 2.0, RadioactiveDecay
> 3.2] for geant4 data...
> Gcc version is 4.0.3
> Libc6-dev 2.3.6
> Libstdc++6-dev 4.0.3
> ========================

I thought that versions of geant4 data could be a reason...with low
> possibility...
> Version of Geant4 data SHOULD NOT be a factor of these problems...
>
> Anyway, we have to work around by suggesting a kind of standard system...
>
> Plz post normal energy spectrum with single_layer.mac on GATE 3.1.2 like
> my
> result...
> Detail version information is welcome~


I use all the versions recommended by Geant4 developpers :

Gate3.0.0 with Geant4.8.0.p01, EMLOW3.0, ELASTIC1.1, NDL3.7, Photon2.0 and
Radia3.0, clhep 2.0.2.2
Gate3.1.0 with Geant4.8.1.p02, EMLOW4.0, ELASTIC1.1, NDL3.9, Photon2.0 and
Radia3.0, clhep 2.0.2.3
Gate3.1.1 with Geant4.8.1.p02, same packages and clhep
Gate3.1.2 with Geant4.9.0.p01, EMLOW4.3, NDL3.11, Photon2.0 and Radia3.2 and
clhep 2.0.3.1
Root5.14 for all
gcc 4.1.1
libstdc++-devel-4.1.1
glibc-devel-2.5-3


Simon


Ps. Geant4 9.1 is released at Dec 14 with G4EMLOW 5.1...
> Ps. Jasmine could you check the version of G4EMLOW?
>
> MJ
>
> ________________________________________
> From: gate-users-bounces at lists.healthgrid.org
> [mailto:gate-users-bounces at lists.healthgrid.org] On Behalf Of Simon Stute
> Sent: Friday, December 21, 2007 8:16 PM
> To: gate-users
> Subject: [Gate-users] Some news about the strange behaviour
>
> Hi all,
>
> I dug more to find the reason of the strange behaviour in energy spectra
> and
> found those results :
>
> - I first installed Gate3.0.0, 3.1.0, 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 on both 32 and 64
> bits
> architectures,and both cluster and single PC.
> - I ran PET and SPECT benchmark on all configurations and compared both
> energy spectra and results from benchmark.C with root : everything was
> identical between all different config.
> - Then I ran the single_layer.mac simulation on all config and obtained
> the
> same difference in energy spectra as Irene and Jasmine reported. Then I
> found that the change in energy spectra occurs between Gate3.0.0 and 3.1.0
> .
> Results from 3.1.0, 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 were the same. (see attached images)
> - I realised then that between Gate3.0.0 and 3.1.0, the associated Geant4
> versions are 8.0.p01 and 8.1.p02. And between these two different Geant4
> versions one of the main changes was the upgrade of the most important
> data
> package G4EMLOW, that move from 3.0 to 4.0, and that includes major
> changes.
> - I decided then to run the single_layer.mac simulation with Gate3.1.0,
> Geant4.8.1.p02 and to change the G4EMLOW4.0 package with G4EMLOW3.0package
> from the older version. Then the energy spectra obtained was more similar
> than this obtained with Gate3.0.0, but still different (see
> energy_3.1.0.EMLOW3.0.jpg image). So I think this little difference is due
> to other main changes between Geant4.8.0.p01 and Geant4.8.1.p02, it is
> statistical I think.
> - The change in behaviour do not come from any digitizer module (adder,
> readout, any blurring ...), they are still the same since Gate3.0.0 and
> even
> before, I compared all files and algorithms.
> - For me it is not possible too to have such differences only due to gcc
> version or stdlib version. But here I ask myself a question : MJ, you said
> you get results with 3.1.2 similar to 3.0.0 but what G4 data packages do
> you
> use ?? Then if you use the good packages version, I do not understand
> anything anymore ... Let me know your thoughts about that.
> - I will now try to reproduce the problem in intersector coincidences with
> the Gate coincidence sorter to see where this problem come from and to see
> if it is relative to the energy spectra problem too.
>
> But now, it is time to go on holidays :-)
> Dig, dig, dig and dig more as say MJ !
> Cheers,
> Simon
>
> PS : sorry but I send the images in different mails due the size
> limitation.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opengatecollaboration.org/mailman/private/gate-users/attachments/20071221/2b3fe1b2/attachment.htm>