exclude channels with unstable pedesta

[argiro]

With weight reconstruction the pedestal was calculated online. The multifit method uses pedestals from the database. Certain categories of channels have unstable pedestal settings, this PR excludes these channels from reconstruction

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @argiro for CMSSW_8_0_X.

It involves the following packages:

RecoLocalCalo/EcalRecProducers

@cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @davidlange6, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@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

[slava77]

@cmsbuild please test

@argiro , should we expect changes only in data or in MC tests as well?

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/10356/console

[argiro]

On 18 Dec 2015, at 14:09, Slava Krutelyov notifications@github.com wrote:

@cmsbuild please test

@argiro , should we expect changes only in data or in MC tests as well?

only data
S.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[cmsbuild]

-1
Tested at: c05665e
When I ran the RelVals I found an error in the following worklfows:
1001.0 step6

runTheMatrix-results/1001.0_RunMinBias2011A+RunMinBias2011A+TIER0EXP+ALCAEXP+ALCAHARVD1+ALCAHARVD2+ALCAHARVD3+ALCAHARVD4/step6_RunMinBias2011A+RunMinBias2011A+TIER0EXP+ALCAEXP+ALCAHARVD1+ALCAHARVD2+ALCAHARVD3+ALCAHARVD4.log

you can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-12824/10356/summary.html

[cvuosalo]

@cmsbuild please test
Hoping previous error was transient

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/10357/console

[cvuosalo]

Extended test in progress...

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: c05665e
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-12824/10357/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-12824/10357/summary.html

[cvuosalo]

@argiro: Why do you say that MC won't be changed? ttbar MC workflows are showing a number of tiny changes in ECAL rec hit quantities in the results from the Jenkins tests:

https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/baseLineComparisons/CMSSW_8_0_X_2015-12-17-1100+12824/11865/validateJR/all_OldVSNew_TTbarFSwf5p1/

https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/baseLineComparisons/CMSSW_8_0_X_2015-12-17-1100+12824/11865/validateJR/all_OldVSNew_TTbarPUwf25202p0/

https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/baseLineComparisons/CMSSW_8_0_X_2015-12-17-1100+12824/11865/validateJR/all_OldVSNew_TTbarPUwf50202p0/

[cvuosalo]

The results of an extended test of workflow 134.805_RunMET2015C with 200 events against baseline CMSSW_8_0_0_pre4 show a number of very tiny, insignificant differences related to the expected changes in ECAL rec hits but do not show any significant differences.

Reco is ready to approve this PR once the issue of the MC differences is resolved.

[argiro]

Hi, I thought the MC payload did not include the flag for channels with stuck pedestal DAC, but evidently it does.
From my side the PR is good to go

On 18 Dec 2015, at 21:03, Carl Vuosalo notifications@github.com wrote:

The results of an extended test of workflow 134.805_RunMET2015C with 200 events against baseline CMSSW_8_0_0_pre4 show a number of very tiny, insignificant differences related to the expected changes in ECAL rec hits but do not show any significant differences.

Reco is ready to approve this PR once the issue of the MC differences is resolved.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[slava77]

+1

for #12824 c05665e

• changes in the code are as described
• jenkins tests pass and comparisons with baseline show small differences starting from EB and EE rechits reduction (about 1 in 10K, depending on the sample) and propagated downstream. There doesn't seem to be any particular correlation with other activity in the event.

[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