Electron MVA V2 and general code changes #23473

guitargeek · 2018-06-04T22:39:19Z

Implemented Fall17 Electron MVA ID V2.
Restructured Electron and Photon MVA ID such that input variables are automatically obtained given their name in the XML weight file.
MVA ID categorization and cuts now specified in python config file.
Added Electron ntuplizer to train/validate MVA implementation
Added Photon ntuplizer to validate Photon MVA implementation.

The changes go together with cms-data/RecoEgamma-ElectronIdentification#9.

It is interesting for @Sam-Harper, @lsoffi, @michelif, @UAEDF-tomc.

cmsbuild · 2018-06-04T22:39:43Z

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

cmsbuild · 2018-06-04T22:44:37Z

-code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-23473/5020

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/cms-sw-PR-23473/5020/git-diff.patch
e.g. curl https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-23473/5020/git-diff.patch | patch -p1

You can run scram build code-checks to apply code checks directly

cmsbuild · 2018-06-05T10:06:57Z

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

cmsbuild · 2018-06-05T10:09:04Z

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-23473/5023

cmsbuild · 2018-06-05T10:09:28Z

A new Pull Request was created by @guitargeek (Jonas Rembser) for master.

It involves the following packages:

RecoEgamma/EgammaTools
RecoEgamma/ElectronIdentification
RecoEgamma/PhotonIdentification

@perrotta, @cmsbuild, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@jainshilpi, @Sam-Harper, @varuns23, @lgray 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

slava77 · 2018-06-05T12:00:25Z

@cmsbuild please test with cms-sw/cmsdist#4056

cmsbuild · 2018-06-05T12:00:47Z

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
Using externals from cms-sw/cmsdist#4056
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/28477/console

cmsbuild · 2018-06-05T15:10:13Z

-1

Tested at: fd07032

You can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-23473/28477/summary.html

I found follow errors while testing this PR

Failed tests: UnitTests RelVals

Unit Tests:

I found errors in the following unit tests:

---> test runtestRecoEgammaElectronIdentification had ERRORS
---> test runtestPhysicsToolsNanoAOD had ERRORS

RelVals:

When I ran the RelVals I found an error in the following worklfows:
4.53 step3

runTheMatrix-results/4.53_RunPhoton2012B+RunPhoton2012B+HLTD+RECODR1reHLT+HARVESTDR1reHLT/step3_RunPhoton2012B+RunPhoton2012B+HLTD+RECODR1reHLT+HARVESTDR1reHLT.log

136.7611 step2

runTheMatrix-results/136.7611_RunJetHT2016E_reminiaod+RunJetHT2016E_reminiaod+REMINIAOD_data2016_HIPM+HARVESTDR2_REMINIAOD_data2016_HIPM/step2_RunJetHT2016E_reminiaod+RunJetHT2016E_reminiaod+REMINIAOD_data2016_HIPM+HARVESTDR2_REMINIAOD_data2016_HIPM.log

136.731 step3

runTheMatrix-results/136.731_RunSinglePh2016B+RunSinglePh2016B+HLTDR2_2016+RECODR2_2016reHLT_skimSinglePh_HIPM+HARVESTDR2/step3_RunSinglePh2016B+RunSinglePh2016B+HLTDR2_2016+RECODR2_2016reHLT_skimSinglePh_HIPM+HARVESTDR2.log

136.8311 step2

runTheMatrix-results/136.8311_RunJetHT2017F_reminiaod+RunJetHT2017F_reminiaod+REMINIAOD_data2017+HARVEST2017_REMINIAOD_data2017/step2_RunJetHT2017F_reminiaod+RunJetHT2017F_reminiaod+REMINIAOD_data2017+HARVEST2017_REMINIAOD_data2017.log

135.4 step3

runTheMatrix-results/135.4_ZEE_13+ZEEFS_13+HARVESTUP15FS+MINIAODMCUP15FS/step3_ZEE_13+ZEEFS_13+HARVESTUP15FS+MINIAODMCUP15FS.log

136.788 step3

runTheMatrix-results/136.788_RunSinglePh2017B+RunSinglePh2017B+HLTDR2_2017+RECODR2_2017reHLT_skimSinglePh_Prompt+HARVEST2017/step3_RunSinglePh2017B+RunSinglePh2017B+HLTDR2_2017+RECODR2_2017reHLT_skimSinglePh_Prompt+HARVEST2017.log

9.0 step3

runTheMatrix-results/9.0_Higgs200ChargedTaus+Higgs200ChargedTaus+DIGI+RECO+HARVEST/step3_Higgs200ChargedTaus+Higgs200ChargedTaus+DIGI+RECO+HARVEST.log

1325.7 step2

runTheMatrix-results/1325.7_TTbar_13_94Xv2NanoAODINPUT+TTbar_13_94Xv2NanoAODINPUT+NANOEDMMC2017_94XMiniAODv2+HARVESTNANOAODMC2017_94XMiniAODv2/step2_TTbar_13_94Xv2NanoAODINPUT+TTbar_13_94Xv2NanoAODINPUT+NANOEDMMC2017_94XMiniAODv2+HARVESTNANOAODMC2017_94XMiniAODv2.log

25.0 step3

runTheMatrix-results/25.0_TTbar+TTbar+DIGI+RECOAlCaCalo+HARVEST+ALCATT/step3_TTbar+TTbar+DIGI+RECOAlCaCalo+HARVEST+ALCATT.log

1306.0 step3

runTheMatrix-results/1306.0_SingleMuPt1_UP15+SingleMuPt1_UP15+DIGIUP15+RECOUP15+HARVESTUP15/step3_SingleMuPt1_UP15+SingleMuPt1_UP15+DIGIUP15+RECOUP15+HARVESTUP15.log

1330.0 step3

runTheMatrix-results/1330.0_ZMM_13+ZMM_13+DIGIUP15+RECOUP15_L1TMuDQM+HARVESTUP15_L1TMuDQM/step3_ZMM_13+ZMM_13+DIGIUP15+RECOUP15_L1TMuDQM+HARVESTUP15_L1TMuDQM.log

136.85 step3

runTheMatrix-results/136.85_RunEGamma2018A+RunEGamma2018A+HLTDR2_2018+RECODR2_2018reHLT_skimEGamma_Prompt_L1TEgDQM+HARVEST2018_L1TEgDQM/step3_RunEGamma2018A+RunEGamma2018A+HLTDR2_2018+RECODR2_2018reHLT_skimEGamma_Prompt_L1TEgDQM+HARVEST2018_L1TEgDQM.log

10042.0 step3

runTheMatrix-results/10042.0_ZMM_13+ZMM_13TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2017_GenSimFull+DigiFull_2017+RecoFull_2017+HARVESTFull_2017+ALCAFull_2017/step3_ZMM_13+ZMM_13TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2017_GenSimFull+DigiFull_2017+RecoFull_2017+HARVESTFull_2017+ALCAFull_2017.log

25202.0 step3

runTheMatrix-results/25202.0_TTbar_13+TTbar_13+DIGIUP15_PU25+RECOUP15_PU25+HARVESTUP15_PU25/step3_TTbar_13+TTbar_13+DIGIUP15_PU25+RECOUP15_PU25+HARVESTUP15_PU25.log

10024.0 step3

runTheMatrix-results/10024.0_TTbar_13+TTbar_13TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2017_GenSimFull+DigiFull_2017+RecoFull_2017+HARVESTFull_2017+ALCAFull_2017/step3_TTbar_13+TTbar_13TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2017_GenSimFull+DigiFull_2017+RecoFull_2017+HARVESTFull_2017+ALCAFull_2017.log

10224.0 step3

runTheMatrix-results/10224.0_TTbar_13+TTbar_13TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2017PU_GenSimFull+DigiFullPU_2017PU+RecoFullPU_2017PU+HARVESTFullPU_2017PU/step3_TTbar_13+TTbar_13TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2017PU_GenSimFull+DigiFullPU_2017PU+RecoFullPU_2017PU+HARVESTFullPU_2017PU.log

10824.0 step3

runTheMatrix-results/10824.0_TTbar_13+TTbar_13TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2018_GenSimFull+DigiFull_2018+RecoFull_2018+HARVESTFull_2018+ALCAFull_2018/step3_TTbar_13+TTbar_13TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2018_GenSimFull+DigiFull_2018+RecoFull_2018+HARVESTFull_2018+ALCAFull_2018.log

11624.0 step3

runTheMatrix-results/11624.0_TTbar_13+TTbar_13TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2019_GenSimFull+DigiFull_2019+RecoFull_2019+HARVESTFull_2019+ALCAFull_2019/step3_TTbar_13+TTbar_13TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2019_GenSimFull+DigiFull_2019+RecoFull_2019+HARVESTFull_2019+ALCAFull_2019.log

20034.0 step3

runTheMatrix-results/20034.0_TTbar_14TeV+TTbar_14TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2023D17_GenSimHLBeamSpotFull14+DigiFullTrigger_2023D17+RecoFullGlobal_2023D17+HARVESTFullGlobal_2023D17/step3_TTbar_14TeV+TTbar_14TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2023D17_GenSimHLBeamSpotFull14+DigiFullTrigger_2023D17+RecoFullGlobal_2023D17+HARVESTFullGlobal_2023D17.log

21234.0 step3

runTheMatrix-results/21234.0_TTbar_14TeV+TTbar_14TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2023D21_GenSimHLBeamSpotFull14+DigiFullTrigger_2023D21+RecoFullGlobal_2023D21+HARVESTFullGlobal_2023D21/step3_TTbar_14TeV+TTbar_14TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2023D21_GenSimHLBeamSpotFull14+DigiFullTrigger_2023D21+RecoFullGlobal_2023D21+HARVESTFullGlobal_2023D21.log

20434.0 step3

runTheMatrix-results/20434.0_TTbar_14TeV+TTbar_14TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2023D19_GenSimHLBeamSpotFull14+DigiFullTrigger_2023D19+RecoFullGlobal_2023D19+HARVESTFullGlobal_2023D19/step3_TTbar_14TeV+TTbar_14TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2023D19_GenSimHLBeamSpotFull14+DigiFullTrigger_2023D19+RecoFullGlobal_2023D19+HARVESTFullGlobal_2023D19.log

250202.181 step4

runTheMatrix-results/250202.181_TTbar_13UP18+TTbar_13UP18+PREMIXUP18_PU25+DIGIPRMXLOCALUP18_PU25+RECOPRMXUP18_PU25+HARVESTUP18_PU25/step4_TTbar_13UP18+TTbar_13UP18+PREMIXUP18_PU25+DIGIPRMXLOCALUP18_PU25+RECOPRMXUP18_PU25+HARVESTUP18_PU25.log

cmsbuild · 2018-06-05T15:10:21Z

Comparison not run due to runTheMatrix errors (RelVals and Igprof tests were also skipped)

cmsbuild · 2018-06-23T09:51:29Z

Comparison job queued.

cmsbuild · 2018-06-23T11:25:54Z

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-23473/28844/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

No significant changes to the logs found
Reco comparison results: 222 differences found in the comparisons
DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 31
DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2899480
DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 26
DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2899264
DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 190
DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 30 files compared)
Checked 128 log files, 14 edm output root files, 31 DQM output files

perrotta · 2018-06-25T11:12:15Z

I would like to understand the new eleID output as it got updated by this PR, e.g. https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/baseLineComparisons/CMSSW_10_2_X_2018-06-22-2300+23473/27222/validateJR/all_mini_OldVSNew_RunSinglePh2017B136p788/

The number (size) of electronIDs increases from 22 to 29: correct? Where is a list of those IDs?
To my understanding, six of the seven extra IDs are the ones configured starting from https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/pull/23473/files#diff-170f93a54063f185360137b9496b90caR147: is it correct? What about the extra one?
Why there are changes also in some of the first 22 IDs (e.g. from nr. 16 to 21)?

Overall: could you please check the output, confirm that it does correspond to what you expect, and possibly also explain here what do you actually expect?

guitargeek · 2018-06-25T13:29:53Z

Hi Andrea, thanks for pointing out these plots. Yes, 7 new IDs is what I expected. The iso V2 has 4 working points because it's including the HZZ working point:
https://github.com/guitargeek/cmssw/blob/ElectronID_MVA2017_V2_102X/RecoEgamma/ElectronIdentification/python/Identification/mvaElectronID_Fall17_iso_V2_cff.py#L80
I didn't include it in NanoAOD though because the HZZ analysis doesn't really need it there.

What is unexpected for me is that some of the old IDs got changed, this should not be the case. At least the MVA values didn't change, otherwise we would have seen that too. I think it's just related to the way the IDs are ordered in MiniAOD:
https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/pull/23473/files#diff-76dede28e7751d7bb6c5c9542de4155cR282

I'm still trying to understand what's going on exactly, but how are the IDs ordered in MiniAOD? Alphabetically or in the order as they are appear in miniAOD_tools.py? I'm investigating but I anticipate that I will come to the conclusion that the IDs got just reshuffled.

slava77 · 2018-06-25T13:35:46Z

On 6/25/18 3:30 PM, Jonas Rembser wrote: Hi Andrea, thanks for pointing out these plots. Yes, 7 new IDs is what I expected. The iso V2 has 4 working points because it's including the HZZ working point: https://github.com/guitargeek/cmssw/blob/ElectronID_MVA2017_V2_102X/RecoEgamma/ElectronIdentification/python/Identification/mvaElectronID_Fall17_iso_V2_cff.py#L80 I didn't include it in NanoAOD though because the HZZ analysis doesn't really need it. What is unexpected for me is that some of the old IDs got changed, this should not be the case. At least the MVA values didn't change, otherwise we would have seen that too. I think it's just related to the way the IDs are ordered in MiniAOD: https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/pull/23473/files#diff-76dede28e7751d7bb6c5c9542de4155cR282 I'm still trying to understand what's going on exactly, but how are the IDs ordered in MiniAOD? Alphabetically or in the order as they are appear in miniAOD_tools.py? I'm investigating but I anticipate that I will come to the conclusion that the IDs got just reshuffled.

The order should be most likely the same as they are inserted in the list of IDs. So, if the new IDs were inserted in the middle, everything after these new ones will look different in the fwlite-based plots

guitargeek · 2018-06-25T13:47:35Z

I didn't know that we do this kind of comparisons, otherwise I wouldn't have inserted them in the middle...

Slava the reason why I'm alarmed it because the number of IDs before the insertion is 1+4+4+3+3 = 15. While the in plots, the first 16 IDs agree, which is one too much. So either there is one additional agreeing by chance (unlikely), or there is something going on which I don't understand.

slava77 · 2018-06-25T13:56:21Z

On 6/25/18 3:47 PM, Jonas Rembser wrote: I didn't know that we do this kind of comparisons, otherwise I wouldn't have inserted them in the middle... Slava the reason why I'm alarmed it because the number of IDs before the insertion is 1+4+4+3+3 = 15. While the in plots, the first 16 IDs agree, which is one too much. So either there is one additional agreeing by chance (unlikely), or there is something going on which I don't understand.

do you have an edmConfigDump for this module (which fills the IDs) before and after?

guitargeek · 2018-06-25T14:09:19Z

I don't know which module I should run edmConfigDump on, since miniAOD_tools.py is not a cfg file...Can you please help me out and tell me more specifically what you'd do? Otherwise I'm just trying to figure it out myself.

slava77 · 2018-06-25T15:01:00Z

On 6/25/18 4:09 PM, Jonas Rembser wrote: I don't know which module I should run edmConfigDump on, since miniAOD_tools.py is not a cfg file...Can you help me out and tell me more specifically what you'd do? Otherwise I'm just trying to figure it out myself.

it's the easiest by rerunning the workflow discussed here with -j 0 (runTheMatrix.py -l xxx -j 0) and then edmConfigDump on the corresponding config that runs PAT

guitargeek · 2018-06-25T15:13:37Z

Ok thank you but now I already dumped the pairs directly from there:
https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/master/DataFormats/PatCandidates/interface/Electron.h#L144

Let's check this file here form the tests:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-23473/28844/runTheMatrix-results/136.788_RunSinglePh2017B+RunSinglePh2017B+HLTDR2_2017+RECODR2_2017reHLT_skimSinglePh_Prompt+HARVEST2017/step3_inMINIAOD.root

So if I loop over the that vector<pair<string, float>> electronIDs and print it out I get:

cutBasedElectronID-Fall17-94X-V1-loose 0
cutBasedElectronID-Fall17-94X-V1-medium 0
cutBasedElectronID-Fall17-94X-V1-tight 0
cutBasedElectronID-Fall17-94X-V1-veto 1
cutBasedElectronID-Fall17-94X-V2-loose 0
cutBasedElectronID-Fall17-94X-V2-medium 0
cutBasedElectronID-Fall17-94X-V2-tight 0
cutBasedElectronID-Fall17-94X-V2-veto 0
cutBasedElectronID-Summer16-80X-V1-loose 0
cutBasedElectronID-Summer16-80X-V1-medium 0
cutBasedElectronID-Summer16-80X-V1-tight 0
cutBasedElectronID-Summer16-80X-V1-veto 1
heepElectronID-HEEPV70 0
mvaEleID-Fall17-iso-V1-wp80 0
mvaEleID-Fall17-iso-V1-wp90 0
mvaEleID-Fall17-iso-V1-wpLoose 1
mvaEleID-Fall17-iso-V2-wp80 0
mvaEleID-Fall17-iso-V2-wp90 0
mvaEleID-Fall17-iso-V2-wpHZZ 0
mvaEleID-Fall17-iso-V2-wpLoose 0
mvaEleID-Fall17-noIso-V1-wp80 0
mvaEleID-Fall17-noIso-V1-wp90 0
mvaEleID-Fall17-noIso-V1-wpLoose 1
mvaEleID-Fall17-noIso-V2-wp80 0
mvaEleID-Fall17-noIso-V2-wp90 0
mvaEleID-Fall17-noIso-V2-wpLoose 0
mvaEleID-Spring16-GeneralPurpose-V1-wp80 0
mvaEleID-Spring16-GeneralPurpose-V1-wp90 0
mvaEleID-Spring16-HZZ-V1-wpLoose 1

So it's indeed alphabetically sorted and the new IDs were inserted exactly in the place that we anticipated from the plots. Here my code for reproducing:

typedef std::pair<std::string,float> IdPair;

std::vector<IdPair> electronIDs = ele->electronIDs();
for (std::vector<IdPair>::const_iterator it = electronIDs.begin(), ed = electronIDs.end(); it != ed; ++it) {
    std::cout << it->first << " " << it->second << std::endl;
}

ele is a pat::Electron. It's maybe not optimal that the ordering is alphabetically because like this we will always get this confusion once new IDs are not added at the end of the alphabetical order.

For comparison, here the same thing for the equivalent file from a random PR where the electron ID was not changed:

https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-23665/28846/runTheMatrix-results/136.788_RunSinglePh2017B+RunSinglePh2017B+HLTDR2_2017+RECODR2_2017reHLT_skimSinglePh_Prompt+HARVEST2017/step3_inMINIAOD.root

cutBasedElectronID-Fall17-94X-V1-loose 0
cutBasedElectronID-Fall17-94X-V1-medium 0
cutBasedElectronID-Fall17-94X-V1-tight 0
cutBasedElectronID-Fall17-94X-V1-veto 0
cutBasedElectronID-Fall17-94X-V2-loose 0
cutBasedElectronID-Fall17-94X-V2-medium 0
cutBasedElectronID-Fall17-94X-V2-tight 0
cutBasedElectronID-Fall17-94X-V2-veto 0
cutBasedElectronID-Summer16-80X-V1-loose 0
cutBasedElectronID-Summer16-80X-V1-medium 0
cutBasedElectronID-Summer16-80X-V1-tight 0
cutBasedElectronID-Summer16-80X-V1-veto 0
heepElectronID-HEEPV70 0
mvaEleID-Fall17-iso-V1-wp80 0
mvaEleID-Fall17-iso-V1-wp90 0
mvaEleID-Fall17-iso-V1-wpLoose 0
mvaEleID-Fall17-noIso-V1-wp80 0
mvaEleID-Fall17-noIso-V1-wp90 0
mvaEleID-Fall17-noIso-V1-wpLoose 0
mvaEleID-Spring16-GeneralPurpose-V1-wp80 0
mvaEleID-Spring16-GeneralPurpose-V1-wp90 0
mvaEleID-Spring16-HZZ-V1-wpLoose 0

perrotta · 2018-06-25T21:03:09Z

Thank you @guitargeek and @slava77 : everything seems to be as it should, then!

perrotta · 2018-06-25T21:15:28Z

+1

Fall17 Electron MVA ID V2 are implemented and included in the miniAOD output
Related code is also cleaned and rationalised
Little time increase (which is fraction of ms's, anyhow) in the electron MVA ID producer is compatible with running it on a larger set of IDs
Reco output is unchanged; miniAOD output includes now the additional IDs
Merging this PR requires that the external [10.2.X] Ele MVA V2 weight files and gzipped all Run 2 weight files cmsdist#4056 is also merged

fabiocos · 2018-06-26T07:13:53Z

+1

@arizzi @gpetruc please note that this affects also NanoAOD

fabiocos · 2018-06-26T07:15:32Z

merge

cmsbuild added this to the CMSSW_10_2_X milestone Jun 4, 2018

cmsbuild added code-checks-pending comparison-pending orp-pending pending-signatures reconstruction-pending tests-pending labels Jun 4, 2018

cmsbuild added code-checks-rejected code-checks-pending and removed code-checks-pending code-checks-rejected labels Jun 4, 2018

cmsbuild added code-checks-approved and removed code-checks-pending labels Jun 5, 2018

cmsbuild mentioned this pull request Jun 5, 2018

[10.2.X] Ele MVA V2 weight files and gzipped all Run 2 weight files cms-sw/cmsdist#4056

Merged

cmsbuild added requires-external tests-started and removed tests-pending labels Jun 5, 2018

cmsbuild added comparison-notrun tests-rejected and removed comparison-pending tests-started labels Jun 5, 2018

cmsbuild added tests-approved and removed tests-started labels Jun 23, 2018

cmsbuild added comparison-available and removed comparison-pending labels Jun 23, 2018

cmsbuild added reconstruction-approved and removed reconstruction-pending labels Jun 25, 2018

cmsbuild added orp-approved and removed orp-pending labels Jun 26, 2018

cmsbuild merged commit 02d4198 into cms-sw:master Jun 26, 2018

guitargeek mentioned this pull request Jun 26, 2018

Rename and integrate Fall17 Electron MVA CJLST/ZZAnalysis#60

Closed

This was referenced Jun 27, 2018

Revert "Electron MVA V2 and general code changes" #23692

Merged

Crashes in electron identification after integration of PR 23473 #23693

Closed

Revert "[10.2.X] Ele MVA V2 weight files and gzipped all Run 2 weight files" cms-sw/cmsdist#4157

Merged

guitargeek mentioned this pull request Jun 27, 2018

Electron MVA V2 and General Restructuring of Egamma IDs - Once again #23700

Merged

perrotta mentioned this pull request Jul 7, 2018

Changed category not defined error to warning in ElectronMVA #23746

Merged

guitargeek deleted the ElectronID_MVA2017_V2_102X branch July 13, 2018 16:28

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Electron MVA V2 and general code changes #23473

Electron MVA V2 and general code changes #23473

guitargeek commented Jun 4, 2018 •

edited

cmsbuild commented Jun 4, 2018

cmsbuild commented Jun 4, 2018

cmsbuild commented Jun 5, 2018

cmsbuild commented Jun 5, 2018

cmsbuild commented Jun 5, 2018

slava77 commented Jun 5, 2018 •

edited

cmsbuild commented Jun 5, 2018 •

edited

cmsbuild commented Jun 5, 2018

cmsbuild commented Jun 5, 2018

cmsbuild commented Jun 23, 2018

cmsbuild commented Jun 23, 2018

perrotta commented Jun 25, 2018

guitargeek commented Jun 25, 2018 •

edited

slava77 commented Jun 25, 2018 via email

guitargeek commented Jun 25, 2018

slava77 commented Jun 25, 2018 via email

guitargeek commented Jun 25, 2018 •

edited

slava77 commented Jun 25, 2018 via email

guitargeek commented Jun 25, 2018 •

edited

perrotta commented Jun 25, 2018

perrotta commented Jun 25, 2018

fabiocos commented Jun 26, 2018

fabiocos commented Jun 26, 2018

Electron MVA V2 and general code changes #23473

Electron MVA V2 and general code changes #23473

Conversation

guitargeek commented Jun 4, 2018 • edited

cmsbuild commented Jun 4, 2018

cmsbuild commented Jun 4, 2018

cmsbuild commented Jun 5, 2018

cmsbuild commented Jun 5, 2018

cmsbuild commented Jun 5, 2018

slava77 commented Jun 5, 2018 • edited

cmsbuild commented Jun 5, 2018 • edited

cmsbuild commented Jun 5, 2018

cmsbuild commented Jun 5, 2018

cmsbuild commented Jun 23, 2018

cmsbuild commented Jun 23, 2018

perrotta commented Jun 25, 2018

guitargeek commented Jun 25, 2018 • edited

slava77 commented Jun 25, 2018 via email

guitargeek commented Jun 25, 2018

slava77 commented Jun 25, 2018 via email

guitargeek commented Jun 25, 2018 • edited

slava77 commented Jun 25, 2018 via email

guitargeek commented Jun 25, 2018 • edited

perrotta commented Jun 25, 2018

perrotta commented Jun 25, 2018

fabiocos commented Jun 26, 2018

fabiocos commented Jun 26, 2018

guitargeek commented Jun 4, 2018 •

edited

slava77 commented Jun 5, 2018 •

edited

cmsbuild commented Jun 5, 2018 •

edited

guitargeek commented Jun 25, 2018 •

edited

guitargeek commented Jun 25, 2018 •

edited

guitargeek commented Jun 25, 2018 •

edited