Reconstruction for the Scope Document

[lgray]

Masked-layer reconstruction for scope document studies.
Smoothed out all issues in PandoraPFA and homebrew reconstruction, response distributions look sane and degrade as expected when layers are dropped.

@boudoul You can find all the new customizations in customizeHGCalPandora_cff.py, there are three, labelled according to associated descope scenario.

@vandreev11 @pfs @kpedro88 @amagnan

Please note that the set of masked layers is not yet final and there may be a further commit after tomorrow's HGC Steering Group meeting to update the dropped layers.

[boudoul]

Hi @lgray , could you please change in customizeHGCalPandora_cff.py (three places : lines 182 - 201 - 220)
process = propagate_layerdropping(process,layer_mask)
by
if hasattr(process,'reconstruction_step'):
process = propagate_layerdropping(process,layer_mask)

it will help to keep the same customize for all steps in RunTheMatrix, thanks

[boudoul]

Hi @lgray , @mark-grimes
Assuming the changes I have requested in my previous comment are taken into account , I have prepared a branch with runthematrix updated : boudoul:hgcaldescope [ https://github.com/boudoul/cmssw/tree/hgcaldescope ]
You can test it by running (for the three scenarios 126XX,140XX,144XX)
runTheMatrix.py --what upgrade -l 12600,14000,14400

Few items before an actual PR

1. please check the three WFs to be sure that I have properly include the customization
2. I can PR once PR Tracker Descope Reference : Fullscope + Defects #9932 is merged to avoid merge conflict
3. I can also add the case of PileUp, but better to check first if the noPU are ok as requested in 1)

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @lgray (Lindsey Gray) for CMSSW_6_2_X_SLHC.

Reconstruction for the Scope Document

It involves the following packages:

RecoParticleFlow/PFClusterProducer
RecoParticleFlow/PandoraTranslator

The following packages do not have a category, yet:

RecoParticleFlow/PandoraTranslator

@cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@mmarionncern, @bachtis 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.
If you are a L2 or a release manager you can ask for tests by saying 'please test' in the first line of a comment.
@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.

[lgray]

@boudoul I have just confirmed that all of the dropped rechit configs are propagated correctly in your PR in each scenario. It looks good to me.

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #9946 was updated. @cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @slava77 can you please check and sign again.

[boudoul]

ok good, thanks @lgray - I will update my branch with the PU scenarios and make a PR once done

[mark-grimes]

@lgray, any news from the HGC Steering Group or is this good to go (pending testing and workflow integration)?

[lgray]

@mark-grimes go ahead with testing and integration. I double checked the layer-dropping scenarios and there don't seem to be any typos.

[mark-grimes]

Please test.

Going to test privately with #9958, but I'll use Jenkins to check for any obvious problems first.

[lgray]

@mark-grimes I need to revert the hadron calibration to an older version. Let me add this commit.

[lgray]

@mark-grimes just FYI we are checking a possible issue with the pandora hadron calibration. That should not stop the integration of this PR, but we should pause cutting a release until we follow this up (later today).

[mark-grimes]

merge

Tested privately with #9966, more details on the testing will be posted there.

@lgray - Okay, put anything else in a new PR. By the way, every event has e.g.

%MSG-e ArborInfo:  PFClusterProducer:particleFlowClusterHGCHEF  30-Jun-2015 14:26:48 CEST Run: 1 Event: 9
Made 5 clusters!
%MSG

I'm going to change this from error to info unless you have any objections.