HIN ECAL monitoring of pulse fit fnctions

[rkunnawa]

This is a DQMOffline module to check the chi squared of the fit functions in the ECAL. required to check during the PbPb data taking. This is the 80X version of the PR #12484.

[deguio]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/9843/console

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @rkunnawa (Raghav Kunnawalkam Elayavalli) for CMSSW_8_0_X.

It involves the following packages:

DQMOffline/Ecal

@cmsbuild, @danduggan, @vanbesien, @deguio, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@argiro, @rociovilar this is something you requested to watch as well.
@slava77, @Degano, @smuzaffar you are the release manager for this.

Following commands in first line of a comment are recognized

• +1|approve[d]|sign[ed]: L1/L2's to approve it
• -1|reject[ed]: L1/L2's to reject it
• assign <category>[,<category>[,...]]: L1/L2's to request signatures from other categories
• unassign <category>[,<category>[,...]]: L1/L2's to remove signatures from other categories
• hold: L1/all L2's/release manager to mark it as on hold
• unhold: L1/user who put this PR on hold
• merge: L1/release managers to merge this request
• [@cmsbuild,] please test: L1/L2 and selected users to start jenkins tests
• [@cmsbuild,] please test with cms-sw/cmsdist#<PR>: L1/L2 and selected users to start jenkins tests using externals from cmsdist

[deguio]

+1

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_8_0_X IBs after it passes the integration tests. This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @slava77, @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: b3d11dd
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-12494/9843/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_8_0_X IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @slava77, @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-12494/9843/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_8_0_X IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @slava77, @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[davidlange6]

@rkunnawa @deguio - apologies for the very generic question - why do we need a "HI" specific version of ecal pulse shape monitoring?

[rkunnawa]

Hi @davidlange6, Since the heavy ion system doesnt have OOT PU we decided to use the "global" reco for online HLT and "multifit 50ns" for the offline reco. We did some studies on MC and run1 Data and wanted to monitor the performance of the fits in run2 data incase we have to request a re-reco with a different method. @yetkinyilmaz @mverwe @richard-cms can comment more about this.

[mverwe]

Hi, this will be discussed today still with TSG. But it looks like we will start running with multi-fit in HLT since the risk of changing last moment is considered to be too high. We however want to monitor the behaviour so that in case multi-fit leads to a large signal loss in PbPb collisions, we detect it as soon as possible.

[davidlange6]

+1