customizeHitRecoveryInGluedDetTkSeedsOnly

[gpetruc]

Customize that switches on HIP mitigation only in tracker-seeded tracks, for the leacy re-reco of HIP-affected eras.

80X backport is in gpetruc:customizeHitRecoveryInGluedDetTkSeedsOnly

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @gpetruc (Giovanni Petrucciani) for master.

It involves the following packages:

RecoTracker/Configuration

@perrotta, @cmsbuild, @slava77, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@ghellwig, @makortel, @felicepantaleo, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @rovere, @VinInn, @mschrode, @dgulhan this is something you requested to watch as well.
@Muzaffar, @davidlange6, @smuzaffar you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here #13028

[slava77]

@gpetruc
For 91X I think that this should be a part of the HiPM era (tracker_apv_vfp30_2016)

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #17807 was updated. @perrotta, @cmsbuild, @slava77, @davidlange6 can you please check and sign again.

[gpetruc]

Ok, now it's era based

[slava77]

@cmsbuild please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/18252/console Started: 2017/03/08 17:59

[cmsbuild]

-1

Tested at: 9e55144

You can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-17807/18252/summary.html

I found follow errors while testing this PR

Failed tests: RelVals

• RelVals:

When I ran the RelVals I found an error in the following worklfows:
10021.0 step4

runTheMatrix-results/10021.0_TenMuE_0_200+TenMuE_0_200_pythia8_2017_GenSimFull+DigiFull_2017+RecoFull_2017+ALCAFull_2017+HARVESTFull_2017/step4_TenMuE_0_200+TenMuE_0_200_pythia8_2017_GenSimFull+DigiFull_2017+RecoFull_2017+ALCAFull_2017+HARVESTFull_2017.log

[cmsbuild]

Comparison not run due to runTheMatrix errors (RelVals and Igprof tests were also skipped)

[slava77]

@cmsbuild please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/18294/console Started: 2017/03/09 17:09

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 9e55144
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-17807/18294/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison job queued.

[slava77]

On 3/9/17 9:22 AM, cmsbuild wrote: +1 Tested at: 9e55144 <9e55144> https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-17807/18294/summary.html — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#17807 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEdcbgU5Ef-LOpq8FmyH2Cqpn0X-WjFFks5rkDVMgaJpZM4MVuwj>.

good. It looks like the last failure in harvesting of 10021 was transient

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-17807/18294/summary.html

There are some workflows for which there are errors in the baseline:
25.0 step 5
The results for the comparisons for these workflows could be incomplete
This means most likely that the IB is having errors in the relvals.The error does NOT come from this pull request

[slava77]

@gpetruc
please add a link to your slides in the PR description for better documentation.
Thank you.

[slava77]

+1

for #17807 9e55144

• implemented as described
• jenkins tests pass and comparisons with baseline show small differences only in 136.731 (2016B workflow using HIPM era) as expected
• higher stat test using 2016E (where the "HIP" effect is more significant) show expected reduction in the number of reconstructed muons, which appear to be predominantly bad quality.

looking at 136.76 (DoubleMuon 2016E)

as expected, there is some reduction in the number of muons (–3.7% in the tested file)

most of the removed muons didn't pass ID
in this example of TM lastStation angle tight ID there are actually more muons passing now

This is more clearly supported with the standard muon eff DQM plots:

a few high-MET events went away

[cmsbuild]

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

[davidlange6]

+1

[slava77]

@gpetruc
we still need a PR for 80X
Please submit one at your earliest.
Thank you.