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
Modification to PythiaFilterMotherSister #33806
Modification to PythiaFilterMotherSister #33806
Conversation
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33806/22795
|
A new Pull Request was created by @mgratti (Maria Giulia Ratti) for master. It involves the following packages: GeneratorInterface/GenFilters @SiewYan, @mkirsano, @cmsbuild, @GurpreetSinghChahal, @agrohsje, @alberto-sanchez can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
if (nephew_pdgId == 11 or nephew_pdgId == 13 or nephew_pdgId == 15) | ||
passLeptonPt = ((*nephew)->momentum().perp() > minLeptonPt); | ||
if (nephew_pdgId == 211) | ||
passTrackPt = ((*nephew)->momentum().perp() > minTrackPt); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What happens if you have multiple? With the current logic the last one need to be above. Is this what you had in mind? or do you mean "implicit assumption"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If the decay products of the sister particle include more than one lepton, only the last one will be checked.
For my use case, this is irrelevant because by construction only one of the decay products will be a lepton.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The code can be easily generalised to the case where multiple charged leptons/pions are present and all of them are required to pass the specified pt cuts. @agrohsje, please, let me know your preference.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i would prefer moving to the generalized setup. @qliphy @silviodonato what do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A generalized setup is fine to me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, thanks. The update will come tomorrow. We've had downtime at our t3 in the last two days.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks so much Maria!
…e leptons and tracks
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33806/22918
|
Pull request #33806 was updated. @SiewYan, @mkirsano, @cmsbuild, @GurpreetSinghChahal, @agrohsje, @alberto-sanchez can you please check and sign again. |
please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-1fc445/15392/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
if (minLeptonPt > 0. and (nephew_pdgId == 11 or nephew_pdgId == 13 or nephew_pdgId == 15)) | ||
failLeptonPt += ((*nephew)->momentum().perp() < minLeptonPt); | ||
if (minTrackPt > 0. and nephew_pdgId == 211) | ||
failTrackPt += ((*nephew)->momentum().perp() < minTrackPt); | ||
} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi Maria. Let me understand. Why is 11,13 and 15 generic. I know it is called lepton pT, but does this cover all needs. Even more about the pion. Can you clarify why this can be hard-coded?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi, are you asking if the current logic covers all possible decay products of the sister particle? If so, not all possible cases are covered; this is ok for my specific case. In order to make this more general, I could implement the pdgid(s) of the nephew particle(s) as parameters, in addition to the corresponding pts. Please, let me know if this option is ok for you or if you had in mind something different.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right. That was my proposal: I would add them as steerable parameters. Thanks!
@agrohsje, perhaps you missed my reply above? Could you please merge or propose changes, so that we can converge on this and the respective backports? |
-code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33806/23056
Code check has found code style and quality issues which could be resolved by applying following patch(s)
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33806/23058
|
Pull request #33806 was updated. @SiewYan, @mkirsano, @cmsbuild, @GurpreetSinghChahal, @agrohsje, @alberto-sanchez can you please check and sign again. |
hi @agrohsje , the proposed changes were implemented. Would it be possible to go ahead with this PR? Thank you! |
please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-1fc445/15716/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
+generators |
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) |
+1 |
This PR modifies the PythiaFilterMotherSister, which is a generator filter introduced in #33308 , designed to
efficiently select events with heavy long-lived neutrinos a B semi-leptonic decay.
The modifications are:
This PR will be followed by a backport in 10_2_X.