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

Adding Phase II EB electron and photon IDs #33518

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Apr 28, 2021

Conversation

jainshilpi
Copy link
Contributor

This new PR (closed #33514) concerns the addition of configs needed for running VID for phase II EB photon (MVA based) and electron IDs (cut based). The added configs can then be used by analysers with EgammaPostRecoTools to embed in the PAT objects. Files modified/added:

(1) RecoEgamma/ElectronIdentification/python/Identification/cutBasedElectronID_Summer20_PhaseII_V0_cff.py
(2) RecoEgamma/PhotonIdentification/python/Identification/mvaPhotonID_Summer20_PhaseII_V0_cff.py
(3) RecoEgamma/PhotonIdentification/python/PhotonMVAValueMapProducer_cfi.py

The related presentations can be seen here:
Phase II photon ID: https://indico.cern.ch/event/879937/contributions/4108370/
Phase II electron ID: https://indico.cern.ch/event/1000891/contributions/4203637/

PR for MVA files for photon (phase II) ID is here:
cms-data/RecoEgamma-PhotonIdentification#8

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33518/22274

  • This PR adds an extra 16KB to repository

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

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

It involves the following packages:

RecoEgamma/ElectronIdentification
RecoEgamma/PhotonIdentification

@perrotta, @jpata, @cmsbuild, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@Sam-Harper, @lgray, @sobhatta, @afiqaize, @varuns23, @ram1123 this is something you requested to watch as well.
@silviodonato, @dpiparo, @qliphy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

test parameters:

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-d73484/14571/summary.html
COMMIT: c0c96fb
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_0_X_2021-04-25-2300/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/33518/14571/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 4 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 38
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2877605
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 7
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2877576
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 37 files compared)
  • Checked 160 log files, 37 edm output root files, 38 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@jpata
Copy link
Contributor

jpata commented Apr 27, 2021

@jainshilpi is it expected that nothing changed in the reco tests? Are these new working points used in some workflow already, or is it for the future? Thanks for clarifying!

@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
from RecoEgamma.PhotonIdentification.Identification.mvaPhotonID_tools import *
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

for maintainability, would it be possible to import explicitly using

from RecoEgamma.PhotonIdentification.Identification.mvaPhotonID_tools import x,y,z

?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It seems to be there in all such similar files in ElectronIdentification as well in PhotonIdentification. It would need change in all such files. Shall we aim that for a separate PR? thanks

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ok, true, it's probably better done in a separate cleaning PR

@jainshilpi
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jainshilpi is it expected that nothing changed in the reco tests? Are these new working points used in some workflow already, or is it for the future? Thanks for clarifying!

Hi Joosep,

nothing is expected to change since currently only the cfg files needed to run VID on the fly are put in. To enable analysers to access the ID decisions, we have EgammaPostRecoTools which can be used on the fly.

@jpata
Copy link
Contributor

jpata commented Apr 28, 2021

+reconstruction

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

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. @silviodonato, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

@qliphy
Copy link
Contributor

qliphy commented Apr 28, 2021

+1

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit f1904b6 into cms-sw:master Apr 28, 2021
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

5 participants