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

remove tracking efficiency and fake rate w.r.t. offline plots from list of ME to be outputed by LS [13.1.X] #41965

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 14, 2023

Conversation

mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

@mmusich mmusich commented Jun 14, 2023

backport of #41937

PR description:

This is a follow-up to PR #41857. After having tested the effect of its backport #41879 into the CMSSW_13_0_X branch (via a replay of CMSSW_13_0_7_patch1 and having checked the output at [1]) it became apparent that few of the ME-s introduced in #41879 are not useful, as they are produced in the harvesting step:

TrackToTrackEfficiencies = DQMEDHarvester("DQMGenericClient",
subDirs = cms.untracked.vstring(
"HLT/Tracking/ValidationWRTOffline/hltMergedWrtHighPurity",
"HLT/Tracking/ValidationWRTOffline/hltMergedWrtHighPurityPV",
),
verbose = cms.untracked.uint32(0),
resolution = cms.vstring(),
efficiency = cms.vstring(
"Eff_pt 'Relative Efficiency vs Pt;#P_T;relative efficiency' ref_matched_pt ref_pt eff",
"Eff_eta 'Relative Efficiency vs Eta;#eta;relative efficiency' ref_matched_eta ref_eta eff",
"Eff_phi 'Relative Efficiency vs Phi;#phi;relative efficiency' ref_matched_phi ref_phi eff",
"Eff_dxy 'Relative Efficiency vs dxy;d_{xy};relative efficiency' ref_matched_dxy ref_dxy eff",
"Eff_dz 'Relative Efficiency vs dz;d_{z};relative efficiency' ref_matched_dz ref_dz eff",
"Eff_dxyWRTpv 'Relative Efficiency vs dxyWRTpv;d_{xy};relative efficiency' ref_matched_dxyWRTpv ref_dxyWRTpv eff",
"Eff_dzWRTpv 'Relative Efficiency vs dzWRTpv;d_{z};relative efficiency' ref_matched_dzWRTpv ref_dzWRTpv eff",
"Eff_charge 'Relative Efficiency vs charge;charge;relative efficiency' ref_matched_charge ref_charge eff",
"Eff_hits 'Relative Efficiency vs hits;number of hits;relative efficiency' ref_matched_hits ref_hits eff",
"FakeRate_pt 'Relative Fake Rate vs Pt;#P_T;relative fake rate' mon_unMatched_pt mon_pt eff",
"FakeRate_eta 'Relative Fake Rate vs Eta;#eta;relative fake rate' mon_unMatched_eta mon_eta eff",
"FakeRate_phi 'Relative Fake Rate vs Phi;#phi;relative fake rate' mon_unMatched_phi mon_phi eff",
"FakeRate_dxy 'Relative Fake Rate vs dxy;d_{xy};relative fake rate' mon_unMatched_dxy mon_dxy eff",
"FakeRate_dz 'Relative Fake Rate vs dz;d_{z};relative fake rate' mon_unMatched_dz mon_dz eff",
"FakeRate_dxyWRTpv 'Relative Fake Rate vs dxyWRTpv;d_{xy};relative fake rate' mon_unMatched_dxyWRTpv mon_dxyWRTpv eff",
"FakeRate_dzWRTpv 'Relative Fake Rate vs dzWRTpv;d_{z};relative fake rate' mon_unMatched_dzWRTpv mon_dzWRTpv eff",
"FakeRate_charge 'Relative Fake Rate vs charge;charge;relative fake rate' mon_unMatched_charge mon_charge eff",
"FakeRate_hits 'Relative Fake Rate vs hits;number of hits;relative fake rate' mon_unMatched_hits mon_hits eff",
),

and as such cannot be saved per-LS basis at the DQM first step.
This PR is technically a no-op, since it's not affecting anything at any level, but I have been requested to clean-up the file to remove possible sources of confusion later on.

PR validation:

Validated in master.

If this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR. If this PR will be backported please specify to which release cycle the backport is meant for:

verbatim backport of #41937 for data-taking purposes.

@mmusich mmusich changed the title remove tracking efficiency and fake rate w.r.t. offline plots from list of ME to be outputed by LS remove tracking efficiency and fake rate w.r.t. offline plots from list of ME to be outputed by LS [13.1.X] Jun 14, 2023
@cmsbuild cmsbuild added this to the CMSSW_13_1_X milestone Jun 14, 2023
@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Jun 14, 2023

A new Pull Request was created by @mmusich (Marco Musich) for CMSSW_13_1_X.

It involves the following packages:

  • DQMServices/Core (dqm)

@nothingface0, @emanueleusai, @cmsbuild, @pmandrik, @syuvivida, @tjavaid, @micsucmed, @rvenditti can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@barvic 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

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor Author

mmusich commented Jun 14, 2023

@cmsbuild, please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

-1

Failed Tests: UnitTests
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-e99249/33161/summary.html
COMMIT: ceab8eb
CMSSW: CMSSW_13_1_X_2023-06-14-1100/el8_amd64_gcc11
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/41965/33161/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Unit Tests

I found errors in the following unit tests:

---> test test-das-selected-lumis had ERRORS

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • You potentially added 10 lines to the logs
  • Reco comparison results: 4 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 48
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3221591
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 3
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3221566
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 47 files compared)
  • Checked 207 log files, 159 edm output root files, 48 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor Author

mmusich commented Jun 14, 2023

---> test test-das-selected-lumis had ERRORS

unit test failure is unrelated.

@syuvivida
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_13_1_X IBs (but tests are reportedly failing) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_13_2_X is complete. 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

+1

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

merge

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit 143cd04 into cms-sw:CMSSW_13_1_X Jun 14, 2023
@mmusich mmusich deleted the clean_nanoDQMIO_13_1_X branch June 14, 2023 21:21
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.

4 participants