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

MTD digitization: add position dependence to BTL amplitudes #41027

Merged
merged 4 commits into from Mar 20, 2023

Conversation

fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

PR description:

This PR is based on the update of the BTL digitization discussed in https://indico.cern.ch/event/1254512/contributions/5270125/attachments/2595148/4479504/MTDDPG_BTL_position_20230217.pdf . A position dependence of the amplitude measured in the sensors at the two extremities of the crystal is introduced, with values from tunable parameters, currently from BTL test beam studies.

The BTL digitization validation is updated accordingly to monitor this effect.

PR validation:

The code has been used to produce the results shown in the presentation above

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

-code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-41027/34556

  • This PR adds an extra 28KB to repository

Code check has found code style and quality issues which could be resolved by applying following patch(s)

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-41027/34557

  • This PR adds an extra 28KB to repository

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @fabiocos (Fabio Cossutti) for master.

It involves the following packages:

  • SimFastTiming/FastTimingCommon (upgrade, simulation)
  • Validation/MtdValidation (dqm)

@civanch, @emanueleusai, @mdhildreth, @cmsbuild, @AdrianoDee, @srimanob, @syuvivida, @pmandrik, @micsucmed, @rvenditti can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@missirol this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @rappoccio you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor Author

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-586f5b/31212/summary.html
COMMIT: e580431
CMSSW: CMSSW_13_1_X_2023-03-10-1100/el8_amd64_gcc11
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/41027/31212/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • You potentially added 3 lines to the logs
  • Reco comparison results: 15329 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 49
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3530374
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 7036
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 29
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3523287
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 7.448 KiB( 48 files compared)
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 20834.0,... ): 1.064 KiB MTD/BTL
  • Checked 213 log files, 164 edm output root files, 49 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: found differences in 4 / 47 workflows

@civanch
Copy link
Contributor

civanch commented Mar 11, 2023

+1

@srimanob
Copy link
Contributor

Are differences from PR test expected, @fabiocos ? Thx.

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor Author

@srimanob I would say so. As you can see, I have added a smearing to the amplitude that was not there before for BTL, this is clearly changing the random number history for the digitization of MTD, and it reflects on the changes observed, which will trigger small changes in whatever is using it. The change in the amplitudes at the two SiPMs does not trigger big observable changes because only this PR is adding histograms to monitor this, and because in the reconstruction the final result is anyway an average, which should keep things unchanged.

@emanueleusai
Copy link
Member

+1

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor Author

@srimanob @cms-sw/orp-l2 this PR might conflict with #41083 by @ctarricone . I would suggest to move forward earlier with this one, while finalizing the newest code, and then rebase that on top of this, if needed.

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cms-sw/upgrade-l2 is there any further question/doubt about this PR?

@srimanob
Copy link
Contributor

+Upgrade

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

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

@srimanob @cms-sw/orp-l2 this PR might conflict with #41083 by @ctarricone . I would suggest to move forward earlier with this one, while finalizing the newest code, and then rebase that on top of this, if needed.

Well, having not noticed a similar warning in #41083 I already merged that one first...
Howeverm I don't see possible conflicts between the two PRs, as they act on different MonitorElement's inside Validation/MtdValidation/plugins/BtlLocalRecoValidation.cc. Github also don't complain for possible conflicts.

Let merge also this one, but please @fabiocos have a look whether some hidden conflict that you are aware of actually showed up

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit ce98e5b into cms-sw:master Mar 20, 2023
11 checks passed
@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor Author

@perrotta according to git everything looked ok, I'll have a look at the status of the code, but presumably it is ok also in this way, thanks

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

6 participants