Add HGCal V6 workflow

[mark-grimes]

1. Replaces the CFCal workflow with HGCal V6 (i.e. numbers 132xx).
2. Factors the common HGCal customisations into one function which the others call.
3. Adds HGCalHEScintillatorSensitive ESProducers, otherwise get failures in reconstruction.

Currently fails in reconstruction with

cmsRun: <build director>/src/Geometry/CaloGeometry/interface/EZMgrFL.h:26: EZMgrFL<T>::EZMgrFL(EZMgrFL<T>::size_type, EZMgrFL<T>::size_type) [with T = Point3DBase<float, GlobalTag>; EZMgrFL<T>::size_type = long unsigned int]: Assertion `vecSize > 0' failed.

@vandreev11, @pfs, @bsunanda

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @mark-grimes (Mark Grimes) for CMSSW_6_2_X_SLHC.

Add HGCal V6 workflow

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/PyReleaseValidation
Geometry/CaloEventSetup
Geometry/FCalGeometry
SLHCUpgradeSimulations/Configuration

The following packages do not have a category, yet:

Geometry/FCalGeometry

@civanch, @Dr15Jones, @boudoul, @ianna, @mdhildreth, @cmsbuild, @srimanob, @nclopezo, @franzoni, @ktf can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@ghellwig this is something you requested to watch as well.
You can sign-off by replying to this message having '+1' in the first line of your reply.
You can reject by replying to this message having '-1' in the first line of your reply.
@fratnikov, @mark-grimes you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[mark-grimes]

@bsunanda, I had to add these lines otherwise get a failure in reconstruction with

----- Begin Fatal Exception 12-Dec-2014 15:32:25 CET-----------------------
An exception of category 'NoProxyException' occurred while
[0] Processing run: 1 luminosityBlock: 1
[1] Running path 'reconstruction_step'
[2] Calling beginLuminosityBlock for module PFClusterProducer/'particleFlowClusterHGCEE'
[3] Using EventSetup component HGCalGeometryESProducer/'HGCalHESciGeometryESProducer' to make data HGCalGeometry/'HGCalHEScintillatorSensitive' in record IdealGeometryRecord
Exception Message:
No data of type "HGCalTopology" with label "HGCalHEScintillatorSensitive" in record "IdealGeometryRecord"
Please add an ESSource or ESProducer to your job which can deliver this data.
----- End Fatal Exception -------------------------------------------------

[mark-grimes]

@boudoul

[mark-grimes]

I've done diffs of the config dumps before and after to make sure the customisation factorisation makes no changes. Some output commands are in a slightly different order since customise_me0() is now called after all other HGCal customisation (but the end result is the same). No changes other than that.

[bsunanda]

HGCalV6 is a version without HGCalHEBack which is the detector being missed by now. So far it can work for GEN-SIM-DIGI. Anything beyond that need to be fixed. This is for the next step of HGCal

---

From: Mark Grimes [notifications@github.com]
Sent: 12 December 2014 16:52
To: cms-sw/cmssw
Cc: Sunanda Banerjee
Subject: Re: [cmssw] Add HGCal V6 workflow (#6894)

I've done diffs of the config dumps before and after to make sure the customisation factorisation makes no changes. Some output commands are in a slightly different order since customise_me0() is now called after all other HGCal customisation (but the end result is the same). No changes other than that.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/6894#issuecomment-66790702.

[mark-grimes]

Okay. I'll leave it a bit longer for other people to comment before merging. If I get no complaints this will go in before the next release.

[boudoul]

thanks Mark, this is perfect for me . I was surprisd to see that it was failing beyong the digi as we were told verbally in a meeting that the reco should run too, but ok it makes sense- Thanks for having defined the WF , I am happy as it is .

[pfs]

Hi Mark, all, this is great already having at digi level. We'll have to follow up the reco with the HErebuild experts. The idea is that HGCal community will test this in parallel to see the differences in performance with respect to the so-called v5 scenario.

[fratnikov]

Here is what I am getting on DIGI step:

Begin processing the 1st record. Run 1, Event 1, LumiSection 1 at 12-Dec-2014 18:19:21.481 CET
HGCalGeometryBuilder-> 1080 cells are produced
%MSG-e HGCDigitizer: MixingModule:mix 12-Dec-2014 18:19:37 CET Run: 1 Event: 1
@ accumulate : can't find HGCHitsHEback collection of g4SimHits
%MSG
%MSG-e HGCDigitizer: MixingModule:mix 12-Dec-2014 18:19:37 CET Run: 1 Event: 1
@ accumulate : can't find HGCHitsHEfront collection of g4SimHits
%MSG
Building the geometry service
Begin processing the 2nd record. Run 1, Event 2, LumiSection 1 at 12-Dec-2014 18:19:47.889 CET
%MSG-w CaloHitResponse: MixingModule:mix 12-Dec-2014 18:19:47 CET Run: 1 Event: 2
No Calo cell found for ID1159219229 so no time-of-flight subtraction will be done
%MSG
%MSG-w CaloHitResponse: MixingModule:mix 12-Dec-2014 18:19:47 CET Run: 1 Event: 2
No Calo cell found for ID1159219229 so no time-of-flight subtraction will be done

[fratnikov]

after the SIM step file contains:

PCaloHits_g4SimHits_HcalHits_SIM. 292439 73744.8
PCaloHits_g4SimHits_HGCHitsEE_SIM. 27209.9 8843
PCaloHits_g4SimHits_EcalHitsEB_SIM. 19584.2 6009.3
PCaloHits_g4SimHits_HcalTB06BeamHits_SIM. 252.5 241.8
PCaloHits_g4SimHits_EcalTBH4BeamHits_SIM. 252.5 241.8
PCaloHits_g4SimHits_HGCHitsHEfront_SIM. 249.7 239
PCaloHits_g4SimHits_HGCHitsHEback_SIM. 248.3 237.6

that is HGCHitsHEfront collection looks to be empty

[vandreev11]

I think the PR#6812 from Sunanda takes care only of GEN-SIM, not the DIGI and not the RECO.
The V6 geometry looks OK visually.
@bsunanda It is a bit of confusion with volume names used for HEB - HEFront and HEBack, as I see.
Those names we have already used for HEF (silicon) and HEB (scintillator), not crucial though.

[fratnikov]

If HEF PCaloHits are supposed to be in HGCHitsHEfront collection, then there is likely some configuration problem preventing producing these hits. @vandreev11 this is SIM step which is supposed to work with this PR.

[mark-grimes]

merge

We can iron out the details in further pull requests.

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 2b6beec
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-6894/1612/summary.html