feat: Add python vertex example + test

[paulgessinger]

This test tries to model all the vertexing combinations, where I noticed that some of them don't seem to produce outputs that make sense to me. It might be that some combinations are not supported / never tested, and I added a warning to the example script if such a combination is configured.

Right now this is still WIP because it's rebased on #1027 since it uses the truth tracking for the test

@baschlag could you help and take a look at this to see if this implementation makes sense?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1028 (0cd0f4b) into main (8b0005c) will decrease coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 0.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1028      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   48.62%   48.62%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         341      341              
  Lines       17511    17512       +1     
  Branches     8244     8245       +1     
==========================================
  Hits         8515     8515              
- Misses       3232     3233       +1     
  Partials     5764     5764              

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...clude/Acts/Vertexing/AdaptiveMultiVertexFinder.ipp	42.04% <0.00%> (-0.15%)	⬇️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 8b0005c...0cd0f4b. Read the comment docs.

[stale]

This issue/PR has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. The stale label will be removed if any interaction occurs.

[paulgessinger]

@Corentin-Allaire this is what I was talking about this morning.

[Corentin-Allaire]

@Corentin-Allaire this is what I was talking about this morning.

@paulgessinger I can cross-check it with the how to and try to run it. I guess for now that will be good enough until either someone with more vertexing knowledge can look at it or someone need to run it and can provide feedback.
I will try to take care of that before tomorrows meeting

[paulgessinger]

@Corentin-Allaire sounds good!

[Corentin-Allaire]

So I have a few comments on the PR. I am obviously not a big vertexing expert but I think this can go in.

[paulgessinger]

I updated this. Unfortunately, I got an error when actually increasing the number of events the test runs on. In the AMVF variant with particle input, on the 59th event, AMVF complains that an empty input is provided. IVF does not seem to have a problem with that event it seems.

13:30:44    AdaptiveMult   ERROR     Error in vertex finder: Empty input provided.

There is still the case of the summary writer complaining that the truth particles are mismatched w.r.t. to the reconstructed tracks. I guess this expected if we don't reconstruct a truth particle?

13:30:44    RootVertexPe   INFO      Total number of generated truth particles in event : 2
13:30:44    RootVertexPe   INFO      Total number of generated truth primary vertices : 1
13:30:44    RootVertexPe   INFO      Total number of selected truth particles in event : 2
13:30:44    RootVertexPe   INFO      Total number of detector-accepted truth primary vertices : 1
13:30:44    RootVertexPe   INFO      Total number of reco track-associated truth particles in event : 2
13:30:44    RootVertexPe   INFO      Total number of reco track-associated truth primary vertices : 1
13:30:44    RootVertexPe   INFO      Total number of reconstructed tracks : 1
13:30:44    RootVertexPe   WARNING   Number of fitted tracks and associated truth particles do not match. Not able to match fitted tracks at reconstructed vertex to truth vertex.

[paulgessinger]

Ah yeah, the cases I mentioned in the previous comment is actually a WARNING, which we disallow in the CI.

Any opinions on what we should do here?

[paulgessinger]

I created #1091 to track the issues that remain with the code added here.

[stale]

This issue/PR has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. The stale label will be removed if any interaction occurs.

[Corentin-Allaire]

You should resolved the conversations.

[paulgessinger]

Ok I think it's all green now. Can you approve again if you're happy, @Corentin-Allaire?

[Corentin-Allaire]

Don't forget to close the last issue !