LHC-statistics web page quality control?
Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2012 3:42 am
Did anyone notice that The LHC Performance and Statistics page has some problems?
I've noticed several times that they were 30+hours behind in posting fills and sometimes had errors in integrated luminosity where a previous fill had been duplicated.
This week all of the Fill Start Times and at least three of the duration values differ between the stats page and the LHC-latest-newslog.
_______LHC-latest-news_______LHC-Statistics
Fill___Date_Time / Duration___Date_Time / Duration
2723 06-11 14:34 / 03:31 __ 06-11 12:15 / 02:26
2724 06-11 20:03 / 01:14 __ 06-11 17:11 / 01:13
2725 06-12 09:44 / 07:05 __ 06-11 21:28 / 07:04
2726 06-12 22:08 / 08:58 __ 06-12 16:57 / 08:58
2728 06-13 11:41 / 11:54 __ 06-13 10:16 / 11:41
2729 06-14 04:00 / 03:29 __ 06-13 23:42 / 03:28
2732 06-14 20:29 / 01:51 __ 06-14 14:07 / 01:52
2733 06-15 02:42 / 13:12 __ 06-14 22:29 / 12:34
I hope this table is not what drives the time-in-stable-beams pie chart because it is not correct.
I realize that this isn't physics and everyone is excited at the moment, but I'm concerned that BECAUSE it's not physics once an entry goes in the table no further attention is payed.
, there, glad i got that off my chest
I've noticed several times that they were 30+hours behind in posting fills and sometimes had errors in integrated luminosity where a previous fill had been duplicated.
This week all of the Fill Start Times and at least three of the duration values differ between the stats page and the LHC-latest-newslog.
_______LHC-latest-news_______LHC-Statistics
Fill___Date_Time / Duration___Date_Time / Duration
2723 06-11 14:34 / 03:31 __ 06-11 12:15 / 02:26
2724 06-11 20:03 / 01:14 __ 06-11 17:11 / 01:13
2725 06-12 09:44 / 07:05 __ 06-11 21:28 / 07:04
2726 06-12 22:08 / 08:58 __ 06-12 16:57 / 08:58
2728 06-13 11:41 / 11:54 __ 06-13 10:16 / 11:41
2729 06-14 04:00 / 03:29 __ 06-13 23:42 / 03:28
2732 06-14 20:29 / 01:51 __ 06-14 14:07 / 01:52
2733 06-15 02:42 / 13:12 __ 06-14 22:29 / 12:34
I hope this table is not what drives the time-in-stable-beams pie chart because it is not correct.
I realize that this isn't physics and everyone is excited at the moment, but I'm concerned that BECAUSE it's not physics once an entry goes in the table no further attention is payed.
, there, glad i got that off my chest