Here again are some notes from the meeting, sketchy and by no means
complete, just listing some of the issues raised through questions
and discussion after each presentation.

Daniel Heuchel - PandoraPFA on AHCAL 2018 Data Studies - Update
---------------------------------------------------------------

FC:  Could shower track segments be use to connect shower parts,
     compensate for the gap and improve performance?
DH:  2 PFA's might be using segments, will look into it.


Bing Liu - SDHCAL energy reconstruction of hadronic showers at CERN PS and SPS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FS:  Electron eliminator is?
BL:  Lead absorber

FS:  Muon hit number around 100 on one plot, more like 85-90 on other, why?
     (Slides 5 and 10)

FS:  Novosibirsk (or other) function might be used profitably for low energies
BL:  will investigate

KK:  Weights added in quadrature.  How is the behaviour at end points.
     This is important for software compensation, might become weird.
     How do the weight functions look like?  (alpha, beta, gamma, slide 11)

RP:  What prevents you to go to low energies (<3 GeV)?
     Should be good ground to test BDT for electron/pion separation
BL:  Data quality not good, Fermilab dependent?
RP:  Analysis might help there.  BTW how linear is data at low energies?


Olin Pinto - AHCAL Digitization - MC production
-----------------------------------------------

RP:  It's good to see all technical details on digitization!

AI:  Question about signal shaping on slide 2.
OP:  Will look into it

KK:  Slide 4 - this is a simplified method with sliding windows.
     Might be more sensitive to hits (at low energies?) if applied to ECAL

KK:  CALICE should agree on priorities for physics lists
     Two are retained here, but there might be others of interest, let us know
FS:  SDHCAL has/has such a list?


Fabricio Jimenez - 2017 SiW-ECAL TestBeam data Shower Shape Analysis
--------------------------------------------------------------------

FC:  tilt in slide 13 due to beam?
FJ:  or detector alignment

JB:  Slide 15:  what is the deficit in longitudinal distribution due to
FJ:  probably overload/overcharge in layer
AI:  confirms, leading to data corruption
??:  any way to flag this online during data taking?
VB:  this is being improved for next test beam, thanks to Adrian


Vidyo participants (28)
-----------------------

Adrian Irles Quiles
Anna Rosmanitz
Bing Liu
Camilo
Daniel Heuchel
Eldwan Brianne
Fabricio Andres Jemenez
Francois Corriveau
Frank Richard Simon
Haijun Yang
Jerry Blazey
Katja Krueger
Linghui
Lorenz Emberger
Lucia Masetti
Naoki Tsuji
Olin Pinto
Roman Poeschl
Sergey
Stan
Taikan Suehara
Tohru Takeshita
Tyosioka
Vincent Boudry
Vladimir Bocharnikov
Wataru Otani
Yazhou Niu
Yu Kato


Concluding remarks
------------------

Thanks to all for lively participation, feedback and general discussions.

A call will be sent soon for the Collaboration Meeting in September,
where everybody will have a chance to contribute to the analysis sessions.