-
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
flag to allow the possibility to activate the ZS offline applied to all crystals #22254
flag to allow the possibility to activate the ZS offline applied to all crystals #22254
Conversation
A new Pull Request was created by @amassiro (Andrea Massironi) for CMSSW_10_0_X. It involves the following packages: RecoParticleFlow/PFClusterProducer @perrotta, @cmsbuild, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
the same functionality can already be achieved and is already used by using Please note that the feature has to be integrated in the master branch first. |
Unfortunately, that is not the case. If we set: will be always true, since "fullReadout" is true, being set by: (and similarly in EE rechit producer). This has been observed "experimentally". I generated with high thresholds, and they were not applied. |
Isn't the problem then in this line
that useSrF false should lead to "false" so that normal cuts are applied? "useSrF" is a property of a full job, not something changing hit by hit. |
We want to intorduce a new feature. The current version has:
I tested before what you are proposing |
On 2/16/18 9:05 AM, Andrea Massironi wrote:
We want to intorduce a new feature.
The current version has:
1. apply threshold only in ZS thresholds -> if I define "useSrF" with
some input tag
2. do not apply thresholds -> if I define "useSrF" as ""
this can be achieved by setting empty thresholds or not using a QTest at
all.
I don't see a clear need to have a QTest that's known at configuration
level to do nothing.
… 3. apply threshold to all rechits -> by setting the newly introduced
flag [this possibility was not available in the past]
I tested before what you are proposing
bool hi = (useSrF ? isHighInterest(detid) : false);
and it definitely has the same effect of the current implementation, but
it will remove the option (2).
I tried to maintain back-compatibility of the code.
I let @emanueledimarco <https://github.com/emanueledimarco> comment on
the details of why the code was written in such a way.
—
|
The other aspect of this PR is that there is a bug in 10_0_X in PF selections. |
The gathering and seeding thresholds are >= than the ones defined here, done on purpose since the study of the different thresholds and effects on high level objects is still ongoing. But without this fix, or the one you propose, it cannot be performed. The only effect here is the threshold applied to the pf-rechits that are not clustered. |
So, my preference now is to change the true to false in the absence of SR info. |
@cmsbuild please test |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
I'll run locally with "false" to see what the impact is. |
-1 Tested at: ce2ffce You can see the results of the tests here: I found follow errors while testing this PR Failed tests: RelVals AddOn
When I ran the RelVals I found an error in the following worklfows: runTheMatrix-results/10824.0_TTbar_13+TTbar_13TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2018_GenSimFull+DigiFull_2018+RecoFull_2018+ALCAFull_2018+HARVESTFull_2018/step2_TTbar_13+TTbar_13TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2018_GenSimFull+DigiFull_2018+RecoFull_2018+ALCAFull_2018+HARVESTFull_2018.log
I found errors in the following addon tests: cmsRun /cvmfs/cms-ib.cern.ch/nweek-02511/slc6_amd64_gcc630/cms/cmssw-patch/CMSSW_10_0_X_2018-02-16-1100/src/HLTrigger/Configuration/test/OnLine_HLT_PRef.py realData=True globalTag=@ inputFiles=@ : FAILED - time: date Fri Feb 16 20:16:30 2018-date Fri Feb 16 20:14:16 2018 s - exit: 18688 |
Comparison not run due to runTheMatrix errors (RelVals and Igprof tests were also skipped) |
the failure in the test is due to hltParticleFlowRecHitECALUnseeded After some thought, I'm convinced now that your solution is more appropriate in a bigger picture:
Eventually, the full solution will be to
This will actually restore the selections to what we had in 2016 as originally intended for 10_0_X; and it will also allow to still have extra flexibility if needed to apply other quality tests using SRFlags. |
To follow up on #22254 (comment) I see that the bug is latent in the current default configuration of PF: the extra PFRecHits are never used or are discarded by downstream code because the thresholds downstream are at least as high as the intended selections that had to be applied in particleFlowRecHitECAL. So, there is nothing to fix in 10_0_X at this point. @amassiro once you have a fix for the HLT parameters, please also make a PR to the master branch. |
+1 |
Comparison is ready Comparison Summary:
|
backport of #22265 |
+1
|
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_10_0_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_10_1_X is complete. This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @davidlange6, @slava77, @smuzaffar, @fabiocos (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
@fabiocos could you please merge? |
+1 |
Hi @amassiro Just to check: the HLT customisation is NOT applied to |
"hltParticleFlowRecHitECALForMuonsMFNoVtx" is using a different QTest:
We have not changed it, since it was as this also in 2017. We have changed all the producers whose QTest in 2017 was "PFRecHitQTestECALMultiThreshold" |
What does this comment mean in the HLT customisation? Something forgotten or to be done later in another PR?
|
Something forgotten, sorry about it. |
Depending on what it is and for both 10_0 and 10_1 we can do it directly in ConfDB rather than via PRs and customisation functions. It depends what the change is! |
In this PR we have both introduced the possibility to apply selections at pf-rechit level eta dependent, and we have defined a set of reasonable thresholds that will be studied by POGs for performance of different objects. The change in the code requires an additional input tag to be handled by the producer (a simple bool) that was not there in the HLT part and that would make the relval matrix crash without the customization. That is why we added the customization function. |
Additional parameters are trivially to handle with a fillDescriptions method (for all parameters). |
Allow ECAL pfrechit thresholds eta dependent in all regions, disregarding if they have been read in Zero Suppression (ZS) of Full Readout (FR).
In the previous version we could activate these thresholds only in ZS regions, or de-activate the application of the thresholds everywhere.
With this PR we can activate the thresholds everywhere, by means of the boolean: "applySelectionsToAllCrystals"