Adding T0 correction to raw digit processing for calib purpose

[linyan-w]

Description

Adding T0 correction to raw digit processing for calib purpose

Checklist

• Added at least 1 label from available labels.
• Assigned at least 1 reviewer under Reviewers,
• Assigned all contributers including yourself under Assignees
• Linked any relevant issues under Developement
• Does this PR affect CAF data format? If so, please assign a CAF maintainer (PetrilloAtWork or JosiePaton) as additional reviewer.
• Does this affect the standard workflow?

Relevant PR links (optional)

Does this PR require merging another PR in a different repository (such as sbnanobj/sbnobj etc.)?

Link(s) to docdb describing changes (optional)

Is there a docdb describing the issue this solves or the feature added?

[hjscott1]

I approve these changes

[bear-is-asleep]

trigger build LArSoft/lar*@LARSOFT_SUITE_v10_04_07 SBNSoftware/sbncode@v10_04_07 SBNSoftware/sbnalg@v10_04_07 SBNSoftware/sbnobj@v10_00_08

[FNALbuild]

✔️ CI build for LArSoft Succeeded on slf7 for e26:prof -- details available through the CI dashboard

[FNALbuild]

✔️ CI build for LArSoft Succeeded on slf7 for c14:prof -- details available through the CI dashboard

[FNALbuild]

❌ CI build for SBND Failed at phase build SBND on slf7 for c14:prof -- details available through the CI dashboard

🚨 For more details about the failed phase, check the build SBND phase logs

parent CI build details are available through the CI dashboard

[FNALbuild]

⚠️ CI build for SBND Warning at phase ci_tests SBND on slf7 for e26:prof -- details available through the CI dashboard

🚨 For more details about the warning phase, check the ci_tests SBND phase logs

parent CI build details are available through the CI dashboard

[bear-is-asleep]

Approved

[nathanielerowe]

trigger build LArSoft/lar*@LARSOFT_SUITE_v10_04_08 SBNSoftware/sbncode@v10_04_08 SBNSoftware/sbnalg@v10_04_08 SBNSoftware/sbnobj@v10_00_08

[FNALbuild]

✔️ CI build for LArSoft Succeeded on slf7 for c14:prof -- details available through the CI dashboard

[FNALbuild]

✔️ CI build for LArSoft Succeeded on slf7 for e26:prof -- details available through the CI dashboard

[FNALbuild]

❌ CI build for SBND Failed at phase build SBND on slf7 for c14:prof -- details available through the CI dashboard

🚨 For more details about the failed phase, check the build SBND phase logs

parent CI build details are available through the CI dashboard

[FNALbuild]

❌ CI build for SBND Failed at phase build SBND on slf7 for e26:prof -- details available through the CI dashboard

🚨 For more details about the failed phase, check the build SBND phase logs

parent CI build details are available through the CI dashboard

[nathanielerowe]

trigger build LArSoft/lar*@LARSOFT_SUITE_v10_05_00 SBNSoftware/sbncode#533

[FNALbuild]

✔️ CI build for LArSoft Succeeded on slf7 for c14:prof -- details available through the CI dashboard

[FNALbuild]

✔️ CI build for LArSoft Succeeded on slf7 for e26:prof -- details available through the CI dashboard

[FNALbuild]

❌ CI build for SBND Failed at phase build SBND on slf7 for c14:prof -- details available through the CI dashboard

🚨 For more details about the failed phase, check the build SBND phase logs

parent CI build details are available through the CI dashboard

[FNALbuild]

⚠️ CI build for SBND Warning at phase ci_tests SBND on slf7 for e26:prof -- details available through the CI dashboard

🚨 For more details about the warning phase, check the ci_tests SBND phase logs

parent CI build details are available through the CI dashboard

[nathanielerowe]

@linyan-w The CI is reporting some significant changes in the spacepoint time values. Can you confirm that these are as expected? log

670: Checking record 0
671: rec.crt_spacepoints[0].time differs: 71946896.0 vs -29280574.0
672: rec.crt_spacepoints[1].time differs: 72163488.0 vs -29063986.0
673: rec.crt_spacepoints[2].time differs: 72168576.0 vs -29058896.0
674: rec.crt_spacepoints[3].time differs: 72194016.0 vs -29033452.0
675: rec.crt_spacepoints[4].time differs: 72224312.0 vs -29003164.0
676: rec.crt_spacepoints[5].time differs: 72238416.0 vs -28989052.0
677: rec.crt_spacepoints[6].time differs: 72388368.0 vs -28839104.0
678: rec.crt_spacepoints[7].time differs: 72427480.0 vs -28799992.0
679: rec.crt_spacepoints[8].time differs: 72538768.0 vs -28688706.0
680: rec.crt_spacepoints[9].time differs: 72561912.0 vs -28665344.0
681: rec.crt_spacepoints[10].time differs: 72607264.0 vs -28620200.0
682: rec.crt_spacepoints[11].time differs: 72619240.0 vs -28608228.0
683: rec.crt_spacepoints[12].time differs: 72639744.0 vs -28587728.0
684: rec.crt_spacepoints[13].time differs: 72907968.0 vs -28319436.0
685: rec.crt_spacepoints[14].time differs: 72991928.0 vs -28235542.0
686: rec.crt_spacepoints[15].time differs: 73024088.0 vs -28203384.0
687: rec.crt_spacepoints[16].time differs: 73037168.0 vs -28190304.0
688: rec.crt_spacepoints[17].time differs: 73109320.0 vs -28118148.0
689: rec.crt_spacepoints[18].time differs: 73461600.0 vs -27765866.0
690: rec.crt_spacepoints[19].time differs: 73777816.0 vs -27449446.0
691: rec.crt_spacepoints[20].time differs: 73885264.0 vs -27342206.0

[nathanielerowe]

Ignoring discrepancy in rec.crt_spacepoints[0].time since likely cause is references being out of sync.