Extention of neutron background simulation #17833
Conversation
|
A new Pull Request was created by @civanch (Vladimir Ivantchenko) for master. It involves the following packages: SimG4Core/Application @cmsbuild, @civanch, @mdhildreth, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here #13028 |
|
please test |
|
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
|
-1 Tested at: 8f5ccbf The following merge commits were also included on top of IB + this PR after doing git cms-merge-topic: You can see the results of the tests here: I found follow errors while testing this PR Failed tests: RelVals
When I ran the RelVals I found an error in the following worklfows: 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 The following merge commits were also included on top of IB + this PR after doing git cms-merge-topic: |
|
Comparison not run due to runTheMatrix errors (RelVals and Igprof tests were also skipped) |
cmsbuild
added
comparison-notrun
tests-rejected
and removed
comparison-pending
tests-started
labels
|
please test |
cmsbuild
added
comparison-pending
tests-pending
and removed
comparison-notrun
tests-rejected
labels
|
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
|
Comparison job queued. |
|
+1 |
|
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 |
cmsbuild
added
fully-signed
simulation-approved
and removed
pending-signatures
simulation-pending
labels
|
Hi @civanch - thanks for the changes- I realize I forgot to ask what the impact is on SIM if these customize functions are used? Do you have some example timing information? |
|
@davidlange6 , I have added a link to the talk with preliminary results to the PR description. There is a request to have different fragments for this study. |
|
thanks - was interested also in technical performance? Is there a drastic increase in time? |
|
If we enable thermal neutrons the time per event increase in several times. The time for simplest mode (XS) is reasonable. |
|
ok, so some care is needed in production? I presume the sim group will take care of propagating that information
… On Mar 10, 2017, at 9:06 AM, Vladimir Ivantchenko ***@***.***> wrote:
If we enable thermal neutrons the time per event increase in several times. The time for simplest mode (XS) is reasonable.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
|
|
+1
… On Mar 9, 2017, at 3:09 PM, Vladimir Ivantchenko ***@***.***> wrote:
@davidlange6 , I have added a link to the talk with preliminary results to the PR description. There is a request to have different fragments for this study.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
|
|
What make it easier is that only MibBias WF is needed for this study, it is ~6 time slower than ttbar. So, extra factor of slow down is compensated. |
This is a clone of #17799.
By request of muon upgrade TDR, thermal neutron simulation extended two another Physics List used for this study. Time window extended from 0.1 second to 10 second. The common part of this customisation is moved to a separate fragment.
Comments to custom fragments are added.
Added extra header which will be used soon.
Should not affect mainstream simulation.
Preliminary results are reported at: https://indico.cern.ch/event/619427/contributions/2500420/attachments/1423597/2183273/Schnaible_CSC-GIF-WM_NeutronBkg-Comparison_7Mar2017_v3.pdf