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
Run3-alca213 Complete the validation of the new AlCaReco for HcalIsoTrackFilter #36621
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ | ||
import FWCore.ParameterSet.Config as cms | ||
|
||
from Calibration.HcalAlCaRecoProducers.alcaHcalIsotrkProducer_cfi import * | ||
|
||
from Configuration.Eras.Modifier_run2_ECAL_2017_cff import run2_ECAL_2017 | ||
|
||
run2_ECAL_2017.toModify(alcaHcalIsotrkProducer, | ||
EBHitEnergyThreshold = 0.18, | ||
EEHitEnergyThreshold0 = -206.074, | ||
EEHitEnergyThreshold1 = 357.671, | ||
EEHitEnergyThreshold2 = -204.978, | ||
EEHitEnergyThreshold3 = 39.033, | ||
EEHitEnergyThresholdLow = 1.25, | ||
EEHitEnergyThresholdHigh= 10.0 | ||
) | ||
|
||
from Configuration.Eras.Modifier_run2_HCAL_2018_cff import run2_HCAL_2018 | ||
|
||
run2_HCAL_2018.toModify(alcaHcalIsotrkProducer, | ||
EBHitEnergyThreshold = 0.10, | ||
EEHitEnergyThreshold0 = -41.0664, | ||
EEHitEnergyThreshold1 = 68.795, | ||
EEHitEnergyThreshold2 = -38.1483, | ||
EEHitEnergyThreshold3 = 7.04303, | ||
EEHitEnergyThresholdLow = 0.11, | ||
EEHitEnergyThresholdHigh= 15.4 | ||
) |
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
@@ -121,9 +121,9 @@ void HcalIsoTrackAnalyzer::analyze(edm::Event const& iEvent, edm::EventSetup con | |||||
if (debug) | ||||||
edm::LogVerbatim("HcalIsoTrack") << "Finds HcalIsoTrkCalibVariablesCollection with " << isotrkCalib->size() | ||||||
<< " entries"; | ||||||
int k(0); | ||||||
#endif | ||||||
for (auto itr = isotrkCalib->begin(); itr != isotrkCalib->end(); ++itr) { | ||||||
int k(0); | ||||||
for (auto itr = isotrkCalib->begin(); itr != isotrkCalib->end(); ++itr, ++k) { | ||||||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This could be a range based loop, right?
Suggested change
And then you'll also not need the line There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Maybe this could be done more systematically in all the HCAL for loops, let me know if you prefer to do that, or fix the cases in the There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I shall do this later systematically in other loops. Let this PR to be merged now |
||||||
t_ieta = itr->ieta_; | ||||||
t_iphi = itr->iphi_; | ||||||
t_goodPV = itr->goodPV_; | ||||||
|
@@ -134,7 +134,6 @@ void HcalIsoTrackAnalyzer::analyze(edm::Event const& iEvent, edm::EventSetup con | |||||
t_pt = itr->pt_; | ||||||
t_phi = itr->phi_; | ||||||
#ifdef EDM_ML_DEBUG | ||||||
++k; | ||||||
if (debug) | ||||||
edm::LogVerbatim("HcalIsoTrack") << "Track " << k << " p:pt:phi " << t_p << ":" << t_pt << ":" << t_phi | ||||||
<< " nvtx:ntrk:goodPV:wt " << t_nVtx << ":" << t_nTrk << ":" << t_goodPV << ":" | ||||||
|
@@ -216,7 +215,6 @@ void HcalIsoTrackAnalyzer::analyze(edm::Event const& iEvent, edm::EventSetup con | |||||
edm::LogVerbatim("HcalIsoTrack") << "eHcal:eHcal10:eHCal30 " << t_eHcal << ":" << t_eHcal10 << t_eHcal30; | ||||||
#endif | ||||||
tree->Fill(); | ||||||
edm::LogVerbatim("HcalIsoTrackX") << "Run " << t_Run << " Event " << t_Event; | ||||||
|
||||||
if (t_p < pTrackLow_) { | ||||||
++nLow_; | ||||||
|
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.
Why is this changed? The .cfi should be used, and it should be created by the fillDescribtion method in the producer .cc file
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.
There are some parameters which depend on the run period. The condition of EE changed over years due to radiation damage. So we need to modify some of the parameters which are ERA dependent. So all parameters are defined through the cfi created by fillDescription and the ERA dependence is put in the cff file which started from the cfi file.