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
Update pythia8 pt hat reweight user hook #19668
Update pythia8 pt hat reweight user hook #19668
Conversation
…. The new scheme is empirically derived and relies on the pythia8 user hooks.
A new Pull Request was created by @aperloff (Alexx Perloff) for master. It involves the following packages: GeneratorInterface/Pythia8Interface @efeyazgan, @perrozzi, @thuer, @cmsbuild, @davidlange6, @govoni can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
please test |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
-1 Tested at: 0a7b0c1 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: AddOn
I found errors in the following addon tests: cmsDriver.py TTbar_Tauola_13TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_cfi -s GEN,SIM,DIGI,L1,DIGI2RAW --mc --scenario=pp -n 10 --conditions auto:run2_mc_GRun --relval 9000,50 --datatier "GEN-SIM-RAW" --eventcontent RAWSIM --customise=HLTrigger/Configuration/CustomConfigs.L1T --era Run2_2017 --magField 38T_PostLS1 --fileout file:RelVal_Raw_GRun_MC.root : FAILED - time: date Mon Jul 10 23:37:44 2017-date Mon Jul 10 23:36:07 2017 s - exit: 21248 The following merge commits were also included on top of IB + this PR after doing git cms-merge-topic: |
Comparison job queued. |
I have a couple of questions after the failed tests:
|
Comparison is ready Comparison Summary:
|
Have the AddOn tests been updated or has the IB been fixed? Can the tests for this PR be retried or will they just fail again? |
please test |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
Comparison is ready Comparison Summary:
|
@perrozzi If this PR meets with your approval would you please sign off on it before this week's ORP meeting? I just want to make sure the PR can be approved in time for CMSSW_9_3_0. |
+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. @davidlange6, @smuzaffar |
+1 |
This pull request is causing failures in the IB RelVals: |
@Dr15Jones This PR added two parameters to an existing function (https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/pull/19668/files#diff-96dae42223a6b851894a2bd75bc7314dR219). Were there IB RelVal tests that used the PtHatReweightUserHook class (https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/pull/19668/files#diff-96dae42223a6b851894a2bd75bc7314dL213)? Why did they not show up when doing runTheMatrix? |
The pull request tests only run a very small number of potential workflows from runTheMatrix, and apparently the flat distribution workflow is not used. The IB runs all the workflows. |
@Dr15Jones Can the test be updated or can I do another PR to make the parameter optional? If the latter, how would I go about doing that in a way that is acceptable to the developers of CMSSW? I was thinking I could use something like: |
You'd need to create a new pull request. The use of Rather than adding more |
Where are the configuration files used by the workflows stored? I've never edited a runTheMatrix workflow. I'd be happy to do the change there as that would be the easiest path. |
I'd suggest doing a github search on the parameter used to turn on the flat distribution. I would expect that to find the files that need to be updated. |
It looks like they are kept in Configuration/Generator/python. |
Doing a
|
I'm working on a new PR right now. |
A new PR #19843 has been made which should fix this problem. |
@aperloff, can you please do the PR for backporting this to 92x and eventually 71x? |
This PR would provide a new UserHook to Pythia in order to generate a sample with a truly "flat" pThat spectrum. These types of samples are currently used by the JetMET group for jet energy calibrations, but currently we are using a sub-optimal configuration; the new method works much better. It is not foreseen that this PR will have any effect on other packages. This should simply add a new feature to the CMSSW-Pythia8 interface.
We would like to include this feature in CMSSW in time for the upcoming 2017 MC production campaign using CMSSW_9_3_0.