CPPFDigis emulator V2 @maseguracern

[maseguracern]

@camilocarrillo @abrinke1
This is the first version of the CPPF emulator. we use the RPC Digitization and
reconstruction as intermedate steps.
Under test you can find two examples, one unpacking 2017F RAW Data (cppf_emulator_RAW.py)
and another one using generated MC events (cppf_emulator_MC.py).
The output of the unpacker is an edm branch named emulatorCppfDigis, following
the CPPFDigi dataformat already committed in CMSSW_10_1_X.

[cmsbuild]

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-22694/4071

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @maseguracern for master.

It involves the following packages:

L1Trigger/L1TMuonCPPF

The following packages do not have a category, yet:

L1Trigger/L1TMuonCPPF
Please create a PR for https://github.com/cms-sw/cms-bot/blob/master/categories_map.py to assign category

@cmsbuild can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@Martin-Grunewald, @kreczko, @thomreis this is something you requested to watch as well.
@davidlange6, @slava77, @fabiocos you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[abrinke1]

Hi @maseguracern , @camilocarrillo ,
From the meeting, I thought that you now only use RPCDigis as inputs to the emulator. But I see now that you also use the RPCRecHit collection. Even if it is only an intermediate step, this is improper for an emulator - reconstructed objects belong in the offline sequences, not online. The RPCDigi object has all the information you need for a complete emulation of the CPPFDigi. Please let me know if I'm missing something, or if there's a good reason the RPCRecHits should be there - otherwise they should be removed.
Best regards, Andrew

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #22694 was updated. @nsmith-, @rekovic, @cmsbuild, @thomreis can you please check and sign again.

[camilocarrillo]

Hi @abrinke1,
You are right the RPCRecHitProducer is added to the sequence just as a temporary safe shortcut to produce the clusterization and the transformation of coordinates. This later would have to be replaced for the emulation of the clusterization done in CPPF. Let me suggest to go ahead with the emulator as it is. In this way, we could make progress in parallel in the CPPF commissioning and DQM development. All this should be transparent when the replacement of the clusterization is done.
Cheers
Camilo

[thomreis]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/27021/console Started: 2018/03/21 15:39

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: decbc4e
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-22694/27021/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison job queued.

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-22694/27021/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• Reco comparison results: 2 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 29
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2497880
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2497703
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 176
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 1.16000000002 KiB( 23 files compared)
• Checked 118 log files, 9 edm output root files, 29 DQM output files

[abrinke1]

Hi @camilocarrillo ,
Thanks for the response. This sounds like a good plan, as long as it does not get forgotten. Also, be aware that major updates to emulators in CMSSW often come with extra scrutiny, as we found with EMTF :)
Cheers, Andrew

[rekovic]

+1

[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 will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @davidlange6, @slava77, @smuzaffar, @fabiocos (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[fabiocos]

@maseguracern @rekovic I understand that this new package does not affect for the time being any central workflow, but it has been tested successfully in standalone with the test configuration provided here. Am I correct?

[fabiocos]

@maseguracern @rekovic sorry I would like to move forward here: at the moment this emulator is running only in the test configuration provided, which I assume has been tested, am I correct?

[maseguracern]

Yes, it is running with demo config file (test folder).

[fabiocos]

+1

[rekovic]

@maseguracern
Please make a 10_1_X backport PR. You can probably still use the same branch. Thanks.