Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix GEM geometry - HCAL emap - HCAL resoCorr HEP17 - SiStrip bad channels [91x version] #17905

Merged
merged 7 commits into from Mar 14, 2017

Conversation

franzoni
Copy link

@franzoni franzoni commented Mar 13, 2017

This PR will lead to the same set of GT's in 91X as this other PR #17886 in do in 90x

Since in 91x, a set of updates
("Summer16 JECs, GEM reco geometry and ESEE Intercalib" - see PR #17702 ; the equivalent 90x #17649 is yet to be merged )
has already been merged,
the changes expected in this PR are fewer than have been observed for the 90x #17886

The changes expected are described in the further down in this chat, since commits have been added

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @franzoni (Giovanni Franzoni) for master.

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/AlCa

@ghellwig, @arunhep, @cerminar, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @mmusich, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @Martin-Grunewald, @ghellwig, @tocheng 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

@franzoni
Copy link
Author

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 13, 2017

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/18365/console Started: 2017/03/13 19:51

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request #17905 was updated. @ghellwig, @arunhep, @cerminar, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @mmusich, @davidlange6 can you please check and sign again.

@franzoni
Copy link
Author

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 13, 2017

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/18381/console Started: 2017/03/14 01:03

@franzoni
Copy link
Author

franzoni commented Mar 13, 2017

This PR will lead to the same set of GT's in 91X as this other PR #17886 in do in 90x

Since in 91x, a set of updates
("Summer16 JECs, GEM reco geometry and ESEE Intercalib" - see PR #17702 ; the equivalent 90x #17649 is yet to be merged )
has already been merged,
the changes expected in this PR are fewer than have been observed for the 90x #17886

The changes expected are described in the following

Summary of changes in Global Tags

Data

Upgrade

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@franzoni
Copy link
Author

phaseI MC 2017:

  • the change in geometry is expected to scatter differences widely, due to its impact on the pseudorandom number sequences
  • low level Sistrip plots hightly segmented -> can't see effect of the channel status changes over the 10 available events (plus the previous bullet)
  • HCAL vs eta hit occupancies are the same or compatible (the emap change is expected to have no effect on digi/rehits)
  • change in occupancy clear in EB, as a result of SelRead and Transparency/Pedestal changes

phaseI MC 2018:

  • same picture as 2017

phaseII MC:

  • the change in channel status is not picked up by the Phase2OuterTracker plots . Tracking is also totally unaffected --> expected

data:

  • 2012B and 2016B unaffected by replacing for GEM reco geometry the IOV 1-inf with 287446-inf

@franzoni
Copy link
Author

+1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants