Muon HLT - fix in TSGForOI

[folguera]

Rescale the TSOS error before finding the compatible detector.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @folguera (Santiago Folgueras) for CMSSW_9_0_X.

It involves the following packages:

RecoMuon/TrackerSeedGenerator

@cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @slava77, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@bellan, @abbiendi, @jhgoh, @echapon, @calderona, @HuguesBrun, @battibass, @trocino, @bachtis, @rociovilar this is something you requested to watch as well.
@davidlange6, @smuzaffar you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here #13028

[slava77]

@cmsbuild please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/18137/console Started: 2017/03/03 21:57

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 93eab55
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-17750/18137/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison job queued.

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-17750/18137/summary.html

[perrotta]

@folguera : the fix is quite reasonable. I don't see any visible effect in the jenkins outputs, though: I imagine that some larger samples are needed in order to be able to see any reflection on the validation plots. Do you have any suggestion about how to quickly spot the effect of this fix? Could you please point out a presentation in which you showed it already?
In any case, I think this should go into 91X first: please provide a PR also for that cycle

[folguera]

@perrotta I cannot think of a quick way of spotting the difference, we simply though it made more sense to rescale before finding the compatible hits rather than doing it later... in the validation plots we ran offline we did not see any effect in terms of performance, I can try to find that plot for you.

In any case we will provide a PR in 91X.

[folguera]

@perrotta I've created the PR in 91X (#17862) and the branch was immediately closed arguing that this branch is closed for updates.

[davidlange6]

and then asking you to create a PR in the master branch instead.Let me know if you have further problems doing that.

…

On Mar 9, 2017, at 7:18 PM, Santiago Folgueras ***@***.***> wrote: @perrotta I've created the PR in 91X (#17862) and the branch was immediately closed arguing that this branch is closed for updates. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[perrotta]

+1
Same as #17917 in 91X
No changes visible in jenkin tests, but the effect of the fix on a larger stat sample shown in #17917 (comment) goes in the wanted direction

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_9_0_X IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @smuzaffar

[davidlange6]

+1