Draft: Multiple scattering in dd4hep

Compute material parameters that are needed for multiple scattering corrections.

Not yet ready, for discussion

@bcouturi @mveghel @dovombru @decianm

Goes with Detector!471 (closed)

Related to #429

added RTA label

mentioned in merge request Detector!471 (closed)

mentioned in merge request LHCb!4390 (closed)

changed the description

added 1 commit

• 976f152a - Added extrapolator test showing errors on state

Compare with previous version

added RTA WP2 Tracking dd4hep labels

changed the description

added priorityhigh label

added 333 commits

• 976f152a...12d746c1 - 328 commits from branch master
• fb8558cd - switch on scattering in track fit with DD4HEP
• fb5f6576 - use DensityFactor directly from json
• dfeceb7f - correct units
• 576e71d2 - Added extrapolator test showing errors on state
• 79a25826 - updatethe master extrapolator test to do more relevant extrapolations

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• 004b0874 - fix ExtrapolatorCovarianceTester

Compare with previous version

added 104 commits

• 004b0874...8b682c72 - 103 commits from branch master
• 233830e2 - switch on scattering in track fit with DD4HEP, add extrapolator covariance tester

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• b4c02ce7 - Fixed formatting

Compare with previous version

mentioned in merge request !3786 (merged)

mentioned in merge request Moore!2907 (merged)

are we going somehwere here? I'll remove priorityhigh as not directly needed for data taking

I think that the conclusion is that DD4HEP geometry/materials still needs updates, and we cannot use it right now for this

that is unfortunate thanks for the prompt reply!

Yes, but it is needed to keep track of DD4HEP developments, no?

Sure, as it helps to see the differences. Or do you think we should merge it already?

maybe in addition with the parametrization determination qmtest? Or is that not feasible?

It is OK but the idea was to make sure that no one uses this MR for reconstruction. Currently I have the parametrizer branch !3808 (merged) which sits on top of this MR, this has to be changed probably

removed priorityhigh label

Can we also have a test (qmtest?) running the parametrization determination? (as discussed offline). This would help with tracking DD4HEP developments.