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

AK5 to AK4 migration with new Global Tags #5666

Merged

Conversation

diguida
Copy link
Contributor

@diguida diguida commented Oct 3, 2014

Merge of #5588 and #5662

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Oct 3, 2014

A new Pull Request was created by @diguida (Salvatore Di Guida) for CMSSW_7_2_X.

AK5 to AK4 migration with new Global Tags

It involves the following packages:

CommonTools/ParticleFlow
Configuration/AlCa
DQM/Physics
DQMOffline/JetMET
DQMOffline/RecoB
FastSimulation/ParticleFlow
JetMETCorrections/Configuration
JetMETCorrections/Modules
JetMETCorrections/Type1MET
PhysicsTools/PatAlgos
RecoJets/JetProducers
RecoTauTag/Configuration
TopQuarkAnalysis/Configuration
TopQuarkAnalysis/TopJetCombination
TopQuarkAnalysis/TopObjectResolutions
Validation/RecoJets
Validation/RecoParticleFlow

@civanch, @diguida, @StoyanStoynev, @lveldere, @danduggan, @mdhildreth, @monttj, @cmsbuild, @cerminar, @nclopezo, @rcastello, @deguio, @slava77, @vadler, @ojeda, @rovere can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@ghellwig, @mmarionncern, @imarches, @yslai, @acaudron, @jpavel, @TaiSakuma, @nhanvtran, @schoef, @ferencek, @pvmulder, @rociovilar this is something you requested to watch as well.
You can sign-off by replying to this message having '+1' in the first line of your reply.
You can reject by replying to this message having '-1' in the first line of your reply.
@nclopezo you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

@diguida diguida mentioned this pull request Oct 3, 2014
@StoyanStoynev
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Oct 5, 2014

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented Oct 7, 2014

the GT changes show up only in Run1 MC: everything significant seems to start from RPC hits, the effects then propagate downstream to muons (mostly feature-less change in chi2 and number of hits), with negligible changes further down in the PF candidates and later. Apparently, muons with most notable variations don't make it through PF selections.

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented Oct 7, 2014

+1

for #5666 a9c40a3

tested in CMSSW_7_2_X_2014-10-03-0200 (test are sign436).
I tested separately the effects of the GT (affect physics in run1 MC) and the rest of the AK5/AK4 code (doesn't affect reco outputs, affects validation).

@diguida
Copy link
Contributor Author

diguida commented Oct 7, 2014

@slava77
thanks for reporting: we are investigating.

@diguida
Copy link
Contributor Author

diguida commented Oct 7, 2014

@slava77
The changes in the RPC hits are expected: as a follow-up of the data-MC workshop, we were requested to update the RPC efficiency and noise with values in agreement with 2012 conditions.
https://cms-conddb.cern.ch/gtList/GTdiff.html?GlobalTag=PRE_STA72_V4&GlobalTag2=PRE_STA72_V6
I am adding @pietverwilligen who can tell us more

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented Oct 7, 2014

@monttj @vadler
Volker and Tae Jeong we will need your signature here, if you don't have any further comments.

davidlange6 added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 7, 2014
@davidlange6 davidlange6 merged commit c52d23d into cms-sw:CMSSW_7_2_X Oct 7, 2014
@diguida
Copy link
Contributor Author

diguida commented Oct 7, 2014

@slava77 I cannot see the changes you describe in the comparison plots attached to this PR (namely 5.1, 25.0). Is there a way to reproduce them?
@abbiendi @battibass @trocino as you can see in this discussion, RPC DPG requested a change of the RPC efficiencies and noise with values in agreement with 2012 conditions, as a follow-up of the data-MC workshop. This is affecting physics performance on Run1 simulations.

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented Oct 7, 2014

5.1 has them:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/baseLineComparisons/CMSSW_7_2_X_2014-10-04-1400+5666/4126/validateJR/all_OldVSNew_TTbarFSwf5p1/

I don't see diffs in 25.0 in the same place, but I have them in my local tests.
This seems inconsistent within jenkins.

Strange.

My tests for the complete PR were run on 03-Oct-2014 around 9pm.
Did the content of the database change, as of 05-Oct-2014 10AM when jenkins jobs were running?

@cmsbuild
could you please rerun the tests just to double-check.

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented Oct 7, 2014

in 25.0 (TTbar run 1) I see

  • RPC hit cluster size
    all_sign436vsorig_ttbarwf25p0c_rpcdetidrpcrechitsownedrangemap_rpcrechits__reco_obj_collection__data__clustersize
  • globalMuons chi2
    all_sign436vsorig_ttbarwf25p0c_minglobalmuontracks_chi2 99

Same with higher stats in 20.0 (single mu pt 10, 2K events)
all_sign436vsorig_singlemupt10wf20p0c_rpcdetidrpcrechitsownedrangemap_rpcrechits__reco_obj_collection__data__clustersize
all_sign436vsorig_singlemupt10wf20p0c_minglobalmuontracks_chi2 99

@diguida
Copy link
Contributor Author

diguida commented Oct 7, 2014

@slava77
Thanks for pointing me to the correct plots. I was looking at the RelMon summary for wf 5.1, where no differences for Muons are found.

Did the content of the database change, as of 05-Oct-2014 10AM when jenkins jobs were running?

No, the tag is there since 2012 and the Global Tag mapping is immutable.

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.

8 participants