New HLT jet ptave filter allowing to specify eta ranges for tagging/probeing jet #5527
Conversation
|
A new Pull Request was created by @fruboes for CMSSW_7_3_X. New HLT jet ptave filter allowing to specify eta ranges for tagging/probeing jet It involves the following packages: HLTrigger/JetMET @Martin-Grunewald, @perrotta, @cmsbuild, @nclopezo, @fwyzard can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. |
| //std::cout << "Good: " << ptAve << " " << dphi << std::endl; | ||
| //std::cout << " Tag: " << iTag->second->eta() << " " << iTag->second->pt() << std::endl; | ||
| //std::cout << " Probe: " << iProbe->second->eta() << " " << iProbe->second->pt() << std::endl; | ||
| //filterproduct.addObject(triggerType_, iTag->second); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are you sure that you want to comment out this line, and the following one?
May I suggest you to remove completely the other lines commented out with "cout" statements, clearly included for your debug while coding? They are so many in this code that they make difficult to read and follow the flow of the code (and one can then also comment out lines unwillingly, then)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are you sure that you want to comment out this line, and the following one?
May I suggest you to remove completely the other lines commented out with "cout" statements, clearly included for your debug while coding? They are so many in this code that they make difficult to read and follow the flow of the code (and one can then also comment out lines unwillingly, then)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have removed the couts and updated the branch (BTW what is the procedure now - should I somehow update the pull request?).
When it comes to saving into filterproduct - it is present in the first loop (line 117, or 114 after cout cleaning), the idea here is to make the trigger efficiency (as a function of jet pt and eta) evaluation easier. Is this acceptable?
|
Sorry, but this seems to be very inefficient coding, using several loops and maps etc. Essentially, you just need a double loop: At this stage 72X is closed, so make a PR for 73X and eventually |
|
I have updated the filter according to instructions, one difference though - refs to all objects passing the eta/pt criteria are saved, not only the ones that form a proper tag-probe pairs. The idea here is to ease the efficiency calculation as a function of jets eta/pt. Is this acceptable? |
|
+1 Update the 72X PR as well, as it exists already! |
New HLT jet ptave filter allowing to specify eta ranges for tagging/probeing jet
New HLT jet ptave filter allowing to specify eta ranges for tagging/probeing jet - needed for double jet triggers for JEC determination