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
Update TrackingParticleFactory::vectorIsInsideVolume(...) function in TrackingTruthAccumulator #9681
Conversation
… TrackingTruthAccumulator The check of vertex z position should be using the absolute value
please test |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
A new Pull Request was created by @jiafulow for CMSSW_6_2_X_SLHC. Update TrackingParticleFactory::vectorIsInsideVolume(...) function in TrackingTruthAccumulator It involves the following packages: SimGeneral/TrackingAnalysis @cmsbuild, @civanch, @mdhildreth can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. |
@jiafulow , you did this PR for 6_2_X and not 7_5_X |
@civanch, it needs to go in separately for 6_2_X_SLHC until we have fully merged the upgrade code into 7_5_X. I assume the 7_5_X pull request is coming. |
Hi @civanch I've just opened a separate pull request on 7_5_X |
merge |
Update TrackingParticleFactory::vectorIsInsideVolume(...) function in TrackingTruthAccumulator
In the function, the check of vertex z position should be using the absolute value.
I suspect this is an accidental bug. It should not affect anyone who uses official samples, and it should not affect any validation plots because the default in trackingTruthProducer_cfi.py has
When the switch is false, the check of vertex position is not done. It only matters when a person decides to switch it on to get only the tracking particles and tracking vertices inside the tracker, as specified by the parameters
However, as it is, the cut on vertex z is applied as a single-sided cut, rather than as a double-sided cut. I believe the expected behavior should be the latter, but I guess it's really up to the experts to decide.
This was first discussed on the pull request #9680 . As suggested by @mark-grimes, this is a duplicated pull request, but instead for the CMSSW_6_2_X_SLHC release.