-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.4k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update to the ZMuSkim #20693
Update to the ZMuSkim #20693
Conversation
The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins. |
+code-checks |
A new Pull Request was created by @rvenditti for master. It involves the following packages: DPGAnalysis/Skims @cmsbuild, @kkousour, @GurpreetSinghChahal, @fabozzi can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
please test workflow 136.730,136.787 |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
+1 The following merge commits were also included on top of IB + this PR after doing git cms-merge-topic: |
Comparison job queued. |
This skim is not tested by Muon POG to satisfy the requirements that we agreed on. Please hold integration until we confirm that it's Ok to proceed. |
I have checked the implementation and found it reasonable. The rate of the new skim is equal to the rate of current skim. Please proceed with integration of the change. |
+1 |
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @davidlange6, @slava77, @smuzaffar (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
@@ -1,44 +1,166 @@ | |||
import FWCore.ParameterSet.Config as cms | |||
|
|||
from Configuration.StandardSequences.MagneticField_cff import * |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
hi @rvenditti - the magnetic field is set at a much higher level than within a skim. Please remove this.
please test workflow 136.730,136.787 |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
+1 The following merge commits were also included on top of IB + this PR after doing git cms-merge-topic: |
Comparison job queued. |
Comparison is ready Comparison Summary:
|
+1 |
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @davidlange6, @slava77, @smuzaffar (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
+1 |
This appears to have broken step3 of workflow 1000.0 with the error
|
|
||
|
||
###create the "tag collection" of muon candidate, embedding the relevant infos | ||
tightMuonsCandidateForZMuSkim = cms.EDProducer("PATMuonProducer", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
looks like an example of merging based on obsolete test results. |
I have updated my branch, do you want me to open a new PR? |
hi @rvenditti - yes please make a new PR. Thanks. |
i realized that I could do it - #20741. |
Change the ZMuSkim defintion in order to meet the need of Muons subsystems DPGs.
Main changes wrt to previous version are:
-definition of the "loose" leg to be an isolated track (not a muon as in the previous skim definition)
-apply tight muon ID on the "tight" leg and increase the value of the cut on pT
-apply additional selections on the dimuon candidate (on the dz(loose leg, tight leg), OS)
New selections have been presented (and blessed) in the muon pog meeting:
https://indico.cern.ch/event/666069/contributions/2722477/attachments/1525026/2384260/ZMUskim_CSC_proposal_Sep18.pdf