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

backport tau pog nanoAOD clean up to 10_6_X #33658

Conversation

swozniewski
Copy link
Contributor

PR description:

clean up of tau related nanoAOD content and DQM, i.e. removal of deprecated MVA IDs, update of decayModeID flags and according update of selection.
changes are supposed to leave run2_nanoAOD_106Xv1 and earlier nanoAOD untouched.

PR validation:

passed code checks/format, unit tests, limited matrix tests

if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:

backport of #33513 to CMSSW 10_6_X for nanoAODv9 producetion.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented May 7, 2021

A new Pull Request was created by @swozniewski for CMSSW_10_6_X.

It involves the following packages:

PhysicsTools/NanoAOD

@cmsbuild, @mariadalfonso, @gouskos, @fgolf can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@gpetruc, @swertz 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

@mariadalfonso
Copy link
Contributor

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented May 7, 2021

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-933c25/14940/summary.html
COMMIT: 5b595f1
CMSSW: CMSSW_10_6_X_2021-05-07-1100/slc7_amd64_gcc700
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/33658/14940/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: 87 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 35
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3215540
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 30
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3215176
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 334
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: -4.478 KiB( 34 files compared)
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 136.8523 ): -4.478 KiB Physics/NanoAODDQM
  • Checked 143 log files, 29 edm output root files, 35 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

Comment on lines 46 to 51
from Configuration.Eras.Modifier_run2_nanoAOD_92X_cff import run2_nanoAOD_92X
from Configuration.Eras.Modifier_run2_nanoAOD_94XMiniAODv1_cff import run2_nanoAOD_94XMiniAODv1
from Configuration.Eras.Modifier_run2_nanoAOD_94XMiniAODv2_cff import run2_nanoAOD_94XMiniAODv2
from Configuration.Eras.Modifier_run2_nanoAOD_94X2016_cff import run2_nanoAOD_94X2016
from Configuration.Eras.Modifier_run2_nanoAOD_102Xv1_cff import run2_nanoAOD_102Xv1
from Configuration.Eras.Modifier_run2_nanoAOD_106Xv1_cff import run2_nanoAOD_106Xv1
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

you can profit to replace all these import with
from PhysicsTools.NanoAOD.nano_eras_cff import *
(to add at the beginning of the file)

@@ -139,13 +142,13 @@ def _tauId8WPMask(pattern,doc):

_variablesMiniV2 = cms.PSet(
_tauVarsBase,
_mvaAntiEVars,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The _deepTauVars2017v2 is not present in master and is also unused in 10_6, so can be cleaned up

https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/pull/33658/files#diff-d54676262d2e5326ee3455e57747fd476b12be16993a8eb0f4794e8771f6526fL123-L129

@@ -158,25 +161,29 @@ def _tauId8WPMask(pattern,doc):

tauTable.variables = _variablesMiniV2

(run2_nanoAOD_92X | run2_nanoAOD_94XMiniAODv2 | run2_nanoAOD_94X2016 | run2_nanoAOD_102Xv1 | run2_nanoAOD_106Xv1).toModify(tauTable,
variables = cms.PSet(tauTable.variables, _mvaAntiEVars, _mvaIsoVars2015Reduced, _mvaIsoVars2017v1, _mvaIsoVars2017v2)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

we removed the _mvaAntiEVars in the master, why not here as well ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't know why, but the era dependency of _mvaAntiEVars here was arranged the other way round than in master, i.e. the default was what is needed in previous eras and for 106v2 it was changed via modifier. I was conservative with my change and only removed the modifier, but if you prefer, I can arrange it like master.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just for completeness: Concerning the line above in particular, this required to restore mvaAntiEVars since it is not done by a following modifier.

rawAntiEle = Var("tauID('againstElectronMVA6Raw2015')", float, doc= "Anti-electron MVA discriminator V6 raw output discriminator (2015)", precision=10),
rawAntiEleCat = Var("tauID('againstElectronMVA6category2015')", int, doc="Anti-electron MVA discriminator V6 category (2015"),
idAntiEle = _tauId5WPMask("againstElectron%sMVA62015", doc= "Anti-electron MVA discriminator V6 (2015)")
idAntiEleDeadECal = Var("tauID('againstElectronDeadECAL')", bool, doc = "Anti-electron dead-ECal discriminator")
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

alright, to be updated. As I said above, I tried to keep changes wrt. present implementation small. But in fact I was wondering why this was not consistent with the convention you are describing.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I will adapt the logic for idAntiEleDeadECal as well (while the quantity itself was not part of the clean up so far)

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request #33658 was updated. @cmsbuild, @mariadalfonso, @gouskos, @fgolf can you please check and sign again.

@swozniewski
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mariadalfonso I applied the requested changes.

@mariadalfonso
Copy link
Contributor

please test

@mariadalfonso
Copy link
Contributor

mariadalfonso commented May 11, 2021

Thanks a lot for this investigation !
Now we understand why the backport wasn't 1:1.
I think we can revert this againstElectronDeadECALForNano vs againstElectronDeadECAL as was originally.
Sorry for more work.

Also worth to add a comment in the python so that we remember later.

Would we have noticed before if sth. was broken within 10_6_X for the modifiers run2_nanoAOD_106Xv2 and run2_miniAOD_devel? I have the impression that these could not work because the following commit was not backported to 10_6_X: e6bfb8f
The given test without nanoAOD era modifier was treated like previous eras in the way it is written here: https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/pull/33658/files#diff-d54676262d2e5326ee3455e57747fd476b12be16993a8eb0f4794e8771f6526fL172
Only for the two named modifiers, the missing quantity was (would have been) accessed. But now it is the default

@swozniewski
Copy link
Contributor Author

I hope that reverting will also work for run2_nanoAOD_106Xv2 with nanoAODv9 (not sure whether this is included in the tests). But I think latest UL miniAOD contains the quantity due to these lines https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/CMSSW_10_6_X/PhysicsTools/PatAlgos/python/slimming/miniAOD_tools.py#L414-L430
Therefore it should be fine. It is restricted to run2_miniAOD_UL, which I think explains why the test failed.
I'll revert the era handling of againstElectronDeadECAL...

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request #33658 was updated. @cmsbuild, @mariadalfonso, @gouskos, @fgolf can you please check and sign again.

@mariadalfonso
Copy link
Contributor

please test

@mariadalfonso
Copy link
Contributor

I hope that reverting will also work for run2_nanoAOD_106Xv2 with nanoAODv9 (not sure whether this is included in the tests). But I think latest UL miniAOD contains the quantity due to these lines https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/CMSSW_10_6_X/PhysicsTools/PatAlgos/python/slimming/miniAOD_tools.py#L414-L430
Therefore it should be fine. It is restricted to run2_miniAOD_UL, which I think explains why the test failed.
I'll revert the era handling of againstElectronDeadECAL...

yes, cmsbuild tests the run2_nanoAOD_106Xv2 here, this is the wf 136.8523
and the nanobot test all the modifiers available in any release :)

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-933c25/15006/summary.html
COMMIT: b4d88c0
CMSSW: CMSSW_10_6_X_2021-05-11-1100/slc7_amd64_gcc700
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/33658/15006/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: 95 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 35
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3215540
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 32
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3215174
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 334
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: -4.478 KiB( 34 files compared)
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 136.8523 ): -4.478 KiB Physics/NanoAODDQM
  • Checked 143 log files, 29 edm output root files, 35 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@mariadalfonso
Copy link
Contributor

please test

(want to recheck with a more update IB where similar changes are made on nanoDQM_cff.py)

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-933c25/15058/summary.html
COMMIT: b4d88c0
CMSSW: CMSSW_10_6_X_2021-05-12-2300/slc7_amd64_gcc700
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/33658/15058/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

The workflows 140.53 have different files in step1_dasquery.log than the ones found in the baseline. You may want to check and retrigger the tests if necessary. You can check it in the "files" directory in the results of the comparisons

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 1318 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 35
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3215568
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 26505
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3188707
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 334
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 52.227 KiB( 34 files compared)
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 136.8523 ): -4.478 KiB Physics/NanoAODDQM
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.53 ): 44.531 KiB Hcal/DigiRunHarvesting
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.53 ): 10.938 KiB Info/EventInfo
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.53 ): 1.172 KiB RPC/DCSInfo
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.53 ): 0.064 KiB SiStrip/MechanicalView
  • Checked 143 log files, 29 edm output root files, 35 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@mariadalfonso
Copy link
Contributor

mariadalfonso commented May 14, 2021

+xpog
changes inline with master and follow up review
(most of the "1318 differences found in the comparisons" are due to the wf 140.53 and unrelated to this PR)

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_10_6_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_12_0_X is complete. 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 May 15, 2021

+1

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit f4300df into cms-sw:CMSSW_10_6_X May 15, 2021
@mbluj mbluj deleted the CMSSW_10_6_X_backport_CMSSW_11_3_X_tau-pog_nanoAODcleanUp branch October 10, 2023 10:18
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

4 participants