Param card for onshell madspin

Asked by Claudio Severi

Hello everyone,
I am working with MadSpin in onshell mode. (A previous version of this question had a misprint here, I wrote fixed order instead of onshell)

I think MadSpin in this mode ignores the parameter card that is used to generate events, and uses the default one for the model.
In fact, the correct param_card is known by madspin, but never copied in madspin_me/Cards.

This is different from usual runs, where the card is copied, see lines 3054-3055 of decay.py.

My question is whether or not this difference of beaviour between onshell and "normal" is intentional.

Thank you,
Claudio

Question information

Language:
English Edit question
Status:
Solved
For:
MadGraph5_aMC@NLO Edit question
Assignee:
No assignee Edit question
Solved by:
Claudio Severi
Solved:
Last query:
Last reply:
Revision history for this message
Olivier Mattelaer (olivier-mattelaer) said :
#1

MadSpin at FO is actually not correct.
I do not remember why but some develloper are working on a fix.

Now I do not remember how the card was handle in this case.

Cheers,

Olivier

> On 6 Jun 2022, at 18:25, Claudio Severi <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> New question #702090 on MadGraph5_aMC@NLO:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/mg5amcnlo/+question/702090
>
> Hello everyone,
> I am working with MadSpin at FO.
>
> I think MadSpin in fixed order mode ignores the parameter card that is used to generate events, and uses the default one for the model.
> In fact, the correct param_card is known by madspin, but never copied in madspin_me/Cards.
>
> This is different from NLO+PS runs, where the card is copied, see lines 3054-3055 of decay.py.
>
> My question is whether or not this difference of beaviour between FO and NLO+PS is intentional.
>
> Thank you,
> Claudio
>
>
>
>
> --
> You received this question notification because you are an answer
> contact for MadGraph5_aMC@NLO.

Revision history for this message
Claudio Severi (claudio-severi) said :
#2

All right, thanks for now!
Claudio