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

Include option for 2018 Jetid working points #27184

Merged
merged 8 commits into from Aug 5, 2019
Merged

Conversation

knash
Copy link
Contributor

@knash knash commented Jun 12, 2019

PR description:

Update to include 2018 jetid version
https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/CMS/JetID13TeVRun2018

This just updates
PhysicsTools/SelectorUtils/interface/PFJetIDSelectionFunctor.h
and not
PhysicsTools/NanoAOD/python/jets_cff.py

PR validation:

Tested that the triggers for tight and tightlepveto seem to fire correctly and that the efficiency makes sense

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-27184/10341

  • This PR adds an extra 16KB to repository

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

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

It involves the following packages:

PhysicsTools/SelectorUtils

@perrotta, @cmsbuild, @santocch, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@davidlange6, @slava77, @fabiocos you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Jun 12, 2019

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-run-pr-tests/914/console Started: 2019/06/12 16:40

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

-1

Tested at: c2c0af6

You can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-10356f/914/summary.html

I found follow errors while testing this PR

Failed tests: UnitTests

  • Unit Tests:

I found errors in the following unit tests:

---> test runtestUtilAlgos had ERRORS
---> test runtestPhysicsToolsNanoAOD had ERRORS

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-10356f/914/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 1 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 33
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3237932
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 703
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3236895
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 334
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 32 files compared)
  • Checked 137 log files, 14 edm output root files, 33 DQM output files

Copy link
Contributor

@perrotta perrotta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Also a rebase is needed, see conflicting files

@@ -289,13 +307,13 @@ class PFJetIDSelectionFunctor : public Selector<pat::Jet> {
}
} // end if basic jet

float etaB=2.4;
// Cuts for |eta| < 2.6 for Summer18
if (version_ != SUMMER18) etaB=2.6;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why not to define here etaB for all versions (with some else if statement, for example).
Then you won't have to redefine by hand inside (almost) every if branch

float etaB=2.4;
// Cuts for |eta| < 2.6 for Summer18
if (version_ != SUMMER18) etaB=2.6;
if((version_ != WINTER17 && version_ != WINTER17PUPPI && version_ != SUMMER18) || quality_ != TIGHT ) {if ( ignoreCut(indexCEF_) || ( cef < cut(indexCEF_, double()) || std::abs(jet.eta()) > etaB ) ) passCut( ret, indexCEF_);}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Splitting the line will improve readability (even better if you run clang format since now: it will be enforced anyhow)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

(The same apply to most of the lines below...)

if ( ignoreCut(indexNEF_TR_) || ( nef < cut(indexNEF_TR_, double()) || std::abs(jet.eta()) <= 2.6 || std::abs(jet.eta()) > 2.7) ) passCut( ret, indexNEF_TR_);
if ( ignoreCut(indexNCH_TR_) || ( nch > cut(indexNCH_TR_, double()) || std::abs(jet.eta()) <= 2.6 || std::abs(jet.eta()) > 2.7) ) passCut( ret, indexNCH_TR_);
if ( quality_ == TIGHTLEPVETO ) {
if ( ignoreCut(indexMUF_TR_) || ( muf < cut(indexMUF_TR_, double()) || std::abs(jet.eta()) <= 2.6 || std::abs(jet.eta()) > 2.7) ) passCut( ret, indexMUF_TR_);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Some better indentation here is mandatory.
Even better if you have already run clang-format

push_back("CEF_TR");
}
}
if( (version_ == WINTER17 || version_ == WINTER17PUPPI || version_ == SUMMER18) && quality_ == LOOSE ){
edm::LogWarning("BadJetIDVersion") << "Winter17 JetID version does not support the LOOSE operating point -- defaulting to TIGHT";
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The LogWarning message must take also "Summer18" into account now

@@ -443,7 +503,7 @@ class PFJetIDSelectionFunctor : public Selector<pat::Jet> {
} else if ( quality_ == TIGHT ) {
set("CHF", 0.0);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Indentation... or clang-format

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

Given the changes observed in DQM in the jenkins tests outputs, and not in the reco output themselves, I have the impression that such PFJetIDSelectionFunctor is picked in the JETMET DQM modules, but not in the reco miniAOD ones.
Could you please shortly remind us how this PFJetIDSelectionFunctor enters in the game, and confirm that what reported in the jenkins tests outputs does make any sense?

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Aug 2, 2019

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Aug 2, 2019

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-10356f/1800/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 4 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 32
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2492470
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 2
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2492151
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 317
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 31 files compared)
  • Checked 132 log files, 14 edm output root files, 32 DQM output files

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

perrotta commented Aug 3, 2019

+1

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

fabiocos commented Aug 5, 2019

@santocch you already signed the previous version of the PR before removing nanAOD, so I assume this is ok for you. Please comment otherwise

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

fabiocos commented Aug 5, 2019

+1

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

fabiocos commented Aug 5, 2019

merge

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit de56c9c into cms-sw:master Aug 5, 2019
@clelange
Copy link
Contributor

clelange commented Aug 5, 2019

@peruzzim @fgolf I guess this should be back-ported to at least 10_6_X, can you confirm? Also, any other branch?

@santocch
Copy link

santocch commented Aug 6, 2019

+1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Aug 6, 2019

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 be automatically merged.

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

8 participants