add customization function to swap offlinePrimaryVertices to offlinePrimaryVerticesWithBS #34098
Conversation
| # | ||
| # mass replace OfflinePrimaryVertices with OfflinePrimaryVerticesWithBS (doesn't affect defaults in the source code) | ||
| # | ||
| def massReplaceOfflinePrimaryVerticesToUseBeamSpot(process): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is an earlier attempt to achieve the same, but apparently this doesn't affect the defaults created with fillDescriptions. Is it foreseen?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why not simply to have offlinePrimaryVertices.vertices="unsortedOfflinePrimaryVertices:WithBS" ?
also, this could be a processModifier
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why not simply to have offlinePrimaryVertices.vertices="unsortedOfflinePrimaryVertices:WithBS" ?
OK, that would work.
also, this could be a processModifier
what is the functional advantage of a processModifier? I was under the impression that such a fixture would be necessary for a "semi-"permanent modification to be made available in release, whle in my opinion this would be needed for a one-shot set of samples.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was under the impression that such a fixture would be necessary for a "semi-"permanent modification to be made available in release, whle in my opinion this would be needed for a one-shot set of samples.
OK then
There was a problem hiding this comment.
do we still need this massReplaceOfflinePrimaryVerticesToUseBeamSpot method?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
not for producing relval samples, though it might be nice to have for private studies on top of it.
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-34098/23280
|
|
A new Pull Request was created by @mmusich (Marco Musich) for master. It involves the following packages: RecoVertex/Configuration @perrotta, @jpata, @cmsbuild, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
…rimaryVerticesWithBS
mmusich
force-pushed
the
swapOfflinePrimaryVerticesWithBS
branch
from
341f76d
to
50245e5
Compare
|
@cmsbuild, please test |
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-34098/23320
|
|
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-dd54aa/15956/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
|
+reconstruction for #34098 50245e5
|
cmsbuild
added
fully-signed
reconstruction-approved
and removed
pending-signatures
reconstruction-pending
labels
|
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 |
PR description:
The possibility to swap
offlinePrimaryVerticeswithofflinePrimaryVerticesWithBS(that use the BeamSpot measurement constrain the vertex position in the x,y plane) has been discussed in the physics coordination meeting.This would give in principle better precision as long as the Beam Spot is measured correctly.
We'd like to study the effect of such swap at all levels by producing dedicated RelVals with this feature, in order to be compared with the regular RelVal samples.
In order to do that we provide here a customization function that changes the source of vertices of
offlinePrimaryVerticesin order to point tounsortedOfflinePrimaryVertices:WithBS.As a caveat this happens at level of already sorted PVs, so the unsorted collections remain the same.
PR validation:
Tested a "would be" special workflow via:
that runs with success.
if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:
Not a backport, no backport needed.
cc:
@mtosi, @vmariani