fixed ptMin threshold for PU subtractor #20482
Conversation
|
The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins. |
|
-code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/PR-20482/656 Code check has found code style and quality issues which could be resolved by applying a patch in https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/PR-20482/656/git-diff.patch You can run |
cmsbuild
added
code-checks-rejected
code-checks-pending
and removed
code-checks-pending
code-checks-rejected
labels
|
The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins. |
|
+code-checks |
|
A new Pull Request was created by @kurtejung (Kurt Jung) for master. It involves the following packages: RecoJets/JetProducers @perrotta, @cmsbuild, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
|
also want to ping @mandrenguyen and @mverwe about this |
| @@ -378,6 +379,7 @@ void PileUpSubtractor::fillDescriptions(edm::ConfigurationDescriptions& descript | |||
| desc.add<double> ("Ghost_EtaMax", 5); | |||
| desc.add<double> ("GhostArea", 0.01); | |||
| desc.add<int> ("Active_Area_Repeats", 1); | |||
| desc.add<double> ("jetPtMin", 10.); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this function (full PileUpSubtractor::fillDescriptions) actually doing anything?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Surprisingly not - I left it since it was already there but I can remove it. The RelVal and DQM run just fine without it.
|
@cmsbuild please test |
|
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
|
+1 The following merge commits were also included on top of IB + this PR after doing git cms-merge-topic: |
|
Comparison job queued. |
|
Comparison is ready Comparison Summary:
|
|
please test |
|
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
|
Why did you remove the fillDescriptions() method? |
|
The fillDescriptions method doesn't seem to do much here. Please correct me if i'm wrong, but I think the parameter consistency check is not performed here since it did not complain previously about passing the code a ptMin parameter. See @slava77 's comment from a couple days ago. |
|
+1 The following merge commits were also included on top of IB + this PR after doing git cms-merge-topic: |
|
Comparison job queued. |
|
@kurtejung what do you mean by "I think the parameter consistency check is not performed here since it did not complain previously about passing the code a ptMin parameter": please provide an example? |
|
Comparison is ready Comparison Summary:
|
|
On 9/14/17 6:21 PM, Kurt Jung wrote:
The fillDescriptions method doesn't seem to do much here. Please correct
me if i'm wrong, but I think the parameter consistency check is not
performed here since it did not complain previously about passing the
code a ptMin parameter
In the current implementation the pset validation is based on the
calling class VirtualJetProducer::fillDescriptions
… —
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#20482 (comment)>, or
mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEdcbnzMWz2PkBKbqiERAnbbLvaqaHYHks5sidERgaJpZM4PVHLT>.
|
|
type bug-fix |
|
+1 for #20482 5934f2e
|
cmsbuild
added
fully-signed
reconstruction-approved
and removed
pending-signatures
reconstruction-pending
labels
|
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 will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @davidlange6, @slava77, @smuzaffar (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
|
+1 |
When the PU subtractor code was upgraded to factorize the descriptions, ptMin was omitted - readding that ptMin value so HI Jet Reco doesn't ignore the value