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

EGM ID Updates from recipes (76X) #11738

Merged
merged 8 commits into from Oct 20, 2015

Conversation

lgray
Copy link
Contributor

@lgray lgray commented Oct 12, 2015

This PR is brings CMSSW in line with the latest EGM recipes.

New IDs:

  • Triggering electron MVA ID for 25ns and 50ns
  • V2 of cutbased electron ID for Spring15, HLT safe at "tight" working point

Bugfix:

  • Photon cutbased ID was applying linear scaling in the endcaps for neutral had iso, it should have been exponential.

Externals PR is here: cms-data/RecoEgamma-ElectronIdentification#6
Please wait until this is in an IB before testing.

@ikrav

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @lgray (Lindsey Gray) for CMSSW_7_6_X.

EGM ID Updates from recipes (76X)

It involves the following packages:

PhysicsTools/PatAlgos
RecoEgamma/EgammaTools
RecoEgamma/ElectronIdentification
RecoEgamma/PhotonIdentification

@cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @vadler, @monttj, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@rappoccio, @Sam-Harper, @imarches, @ahinzmann, @acaudron, @mmarionncern, @jdolen, @nhanvtran, @schoef, @ferencek, @gpetruc, @mariadalfonso, @pvmulder, @TaiSakuma 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.
If you are a L2 or a release manager you can ask for tests by saying 'please test' in the first line of a comment.
@Degano you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented Oct 13, 2015

@lgray here and in your other two PRs I'm not going to trigger tests, assuming you will detect when the IB with the externals show up

@lgray
Copy link
Contributor Author

lgray commented Oct 13, 2015

@slava77 Yes, I'll take care of starting the tests.

@lgray
Copy link
Contributor Author

lgray commented Oct 14, 2015

@cmsbuild please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/8804/console

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request #11738 was updated. @cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @vadler, @monttj, @slava77 can you please check and sign again.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

-1
Tested at: 4215ca0
you can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-11738/8804/summary.html

@lgray
Copy link
Contributor Author

lgray commented Oct 14, 2015

Errors seem to be with runTheMatrix.py itself:

Deprecated, please use -l limited
processing relval_standard
ERROR in Step
overwritting RunHLTPhy2015C not allowed

and then it quits...

Will wait for the IBs to be fixed before proceeding.
Luckily VID unit tests are OK!

@smuzaffar
Copy link
Contributor

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/8870/console

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

-1
Tested at: 4215ca0
When I ran the RelVals I found an error in the following worklfows:
4.53 step3

runTheMatrix-results/4.53_RunPhoton2012B+RunPhoton2012B+HLTD+RECODreHLT+HARVESTDreHLT/step3_RunPhoton2012B+RunPhoton2012B+HLTD+RECODreHLT+HARVESTDreHLT.log

135.4 step3

runTheMatrix-results/135.4_ZEE_13+ZEEFS_13+HARVESTUP15FS+MINIAODMCUP15FS/step3_ZEE_13+ZEEFS_13+HARVESTUP15FS+MINIAODMCUP15FS.log

1306.0 step3

runTheMatrix-results/1306.0_SingleMuPt1_UP15+SingleMuPt1_UP15+DIGIUP15+RECOUP15+HARVESTUP15/step3_SingleMuPt1_UP15+SingleMuPt1_UP15+DIGIUP15+RECOUP15+HARVESTUP15.log

1330.0 step3

runTheMatrix-results/1330.0_ZMM_13+ZMM_13+DIGIUP15+RECOUP15+HARVESTUP15/step3_ZMM_13+ZMM_13+DIGIUP15+RECOUP15+HARVESTUP15.log

25202.0 step3

runTheMatrix-results/25202.0_TTbar_13+TTbar_13+DIGIUP15_PU25+RECOUP15_PU25+HARVESTUP15_PU25/step3_TTbar_13+TTbar_13+DIGIUP15_PU25+RECOUP15_PU25+HARVESTUP15_PU25.log

50202.0 step3

runTheMatrix-results/50202.0_TTbar_13+TTbar_13+DIGIUP15_PU50+RECOUP15_PU50+HARVESTUP15_PU50/step3_TTbar_13+TTbar_13+DIGIUP15_PU50+RECOUP15_PU50+HARVESTUP15_PU50.log

you can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-11738/8870/summary.html

@lgray
Copy link
Contributor Author

lgray commented Oct 15, 2015

@cmsbuild please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/8885/console

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request #11738 was updated. @cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @vadler, @monttj, @slava77 can you please check and sign again.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

theBeamSpot->position());
double vertexFitProbability = -1.;
if(!conv_ref.isNull()) {
const reco::Vertex &vtx = conv_ref.get()->conversionVertex(); if (vtx.isValid()) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

new line in front of the "if" would be nice

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented Oct 20, 2015

+1

for #11738 2f1cf60

  • code changes are in line with the PR description
    • minor code review comments can be addressed separately
  • jenkins tests pass and comparisons with baseline show no differences (the only changes expected are in ID variables [user floats ] in the slimmedPhotons and electrons)
  • local tests show
    • changes in timing of electronMVAValueMapProducer increasing by almost x2 (still under 1ms/evt): expected since new variables are computed for electrons, and the same count with similar complexity for photons
    • event size changes show differences only in miniAOD, most visible in the slimmedElectrons (1% increase in the branch size on 200 events from DoubleEG PD)

davidlange6 added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 20, 2015
@davidlange6 davidlange6 merged commit 3e46e44 into cms-sw:CMSSW_7_6_X Oct 20, 2015
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.

None yet

6 participants