Skip to content
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

Fixes OOTPU for BTLDigitisation #25496

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 14, 2018
Merged

Conversation

pmeridian
Copy link
Contributor

Fixes a problem of using OOTPU hits in BTL giving rise to a large peak at saturated TDC value. Important to be taken for the ongoing DIGI-RECO MTD TDR campaign.
Plots are the BTL rechits time as obtained from a SingleMu Pt10 GUN with average 10 PU events before and after the fix:
Before
screen shot 2018-12-13 at 18 40 30
After
screen shot 2018-12-13 at 20 39 24

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @pmeridian for master.

It involves the following packages:

SimFastTiming/FastTimingCommon

@cmsbuild, @civanch, @kpedro88, @mdhildreth can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@davidlange6, @slava77, @fabiocos you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@kpedro88
Copy link
Contributor

@pmeridian 10_4_0_mtd2 was already created. Is this needed for any DIGI production?

@kpedro88
Copy link
Contributor

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Dec 13, 2018

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/32180/console Started: 2018/12/13 21:23

@pmeridian
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yes. Launching the pilot production with mtd2 is OK, but for the 1M events production we will need this

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

fabiocos commented Dec 13, 2018

no PU samples should be ok, but there is a protection missing for negative times as moved by MixingModule that affects events with OOT. ETL should be unaffected, but the new digitizer by @casarsa for BTL needs this addition

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-25496/32180/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 1 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 33
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3136423
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 2
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3136217
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 204
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 32 files compared)
  • Checked 137 log files, 14 edm output root files, 33 DQM output files

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

type bug-fix

@civanch @kpedro88 this is a critical bug fix for the MTD digitization with PU. According to checks done by @pmeridian and @casarsa this fixes the issue mentioned at the beginning with no observed further drawback

@kpedro88
Copy link
Contributor

+upgrade

(simHitIt->second).hit_info[0][0] += Npe;
(simHitIt->second).hit_info[0][1] += Npe;

double distR = 0.5*topo.pitch().second - 0.1*hit.localPosition().y();
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

these calculations should be done in an "else" statement after the "if" statement below (otherwise the calculations can be done twice for no reason)
this can be addressed in a followup PR

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Indeed. I did not change it to keep it as much as "before", but there is no need to do this twice (anyway our reference D35 will not enter in the if statement)

@civanch
Copy link
Contributor

civanch commented Dec 14, 2018

+1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

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, @fabiocos (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants