Skip to content
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

UL18 meta-conditions #1249

Closed

Conversation

rchatter
Copy link
Contributor

[Do not merge]
Added the UL18 S+S in the so called "old" format.
Test run on GGH with the RR18 catalog [since the new UL18 catalog crashes for GGH].

Will keep updating this PR with more UL18 ingredients that are already available.
Validation of this UL18 S+S in flashGG, derivation of shower shape corrections[@simonepigazzini ], vertex ID SFs[@youyingli ] can already begin on top of this PR.

@rchatter
Copy link
Contributor Author

BTW just to add here the UL18 S+S file needs to be downloaded, so this is best merged on top of a fresh installation OR setup_flashgg.sh needs to be re-run at least line#54

]
}
},
"flashggDiPhotonSystematics" : "flashggDiPhotonSystematics2018_Legacy_cfi.py",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

hi @rchatter, before merging can you please remove .py from flashggDiPhotonSystematics2018_Legacy_cfi.py?

It isn't backward compatible with MetaData/data/MetaConditions/Era2017_legacy_v1.json and raises an error when running Validation/test/tagAndProbe_test.py which is misleading and makes it a bit hard to get to the source of the problem.

Thanks :)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hey thanks for spotting this. I had fixed it but forgotten to commit ...

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

umm no, I had committed the fix rchatter@fc1a59f
@maxgalli could you check again?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok I see, my mistake, I didn't pull it. Thanks!

@maxgalli
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @rchatter, the shower shapes corrections for 2018 Legacy are ready and available in /eos/cms/store/group/phys_higgs/cmshgg/flashgg-data/Taggers/data/PhoIdInputsCorrections/2018_Legacy (regressors) and /eos/cms/store/group/phys_higgs/cmshgg/flashgg-data/Taggers/data/PhoIdInputsCorrections/corrections_summary_2018_Legacy.json (summary).

I'm thus going to add to this PR a commit which adds the updated path to MetaData/data/MetaConditions/Era2018_legacy_v1.json.

I have a question though: as suggested by @simonepigazzini, I performed the training on TnP datasets produced with also this change (maxgalli@0618a96). Should I include this commit as well?

@rchatter
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @rchatter, the shower shapes corrections for 2018 Legacy are ready and available in /eos/cms/store/group/phys_higgs/cmshgg/flashgg-data/Taggers/data/PhoIdInputsCorrections/2018_Legacy (regressors) and /eos/cms/store/group/phys_higgs/cmshgg/flashgg-data/Taggers/data/PhoIdInputsCorrections/corrections_summary_2018_Legacy.json (summary).

I'm thus going to add to this PR a commit which adds the updated path to MetaData/data/MetaConditions/Era2018_legacy_v1.json.

I have a question though: as suggested by @simonepigazzini, I performed the training on TnP datasets produced with also this change (maxgalli@0618a96). Should I include this commit as well?

Hi Max,
Sorry I missed this message yesterday.
The global tags you have here (maxgalli/flashgg@0618a96) are indeed the most up-to-date for the UL18 dataset. So please include this commit as well. Thanks for this fix!

Best,
Rajdeep

@rchatter
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi You-Ying,

I wanted to add the UL18 Trigger efficiencies that @Soumyatifr derived. Since this PR is still open shall I do it on top of this one?
Also have the UL18 Vertex SFs that you had derived been merged already?

Thanks,
Rajdeep

@youyingli
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @rchatter, yes, you can update trigger SF here before you fix the conflict. Once the SS correction is finished, you can also pull it to here. For me, I will also put the UL18 vtx SF here as well. Then, other materials like JEC/JER can be updated.

@rchatter
Copy link
Contributor Author

rchatter commented May 24, 2021

Hi @rchatter, yes, you can update trigger SF here before you fix the conflict. Once the SS correction is finished, you can also pull it to here. For me, I will also put the UL18 vtx SF here as well. Then, other materials like JEC/JER can be updated.

Hi @youyingli ,
I submitted a fresh PR #1269 to add the Trigger ID SFs. Once that is merged @Prasant1993 can update the ID SFs and you can commit the the vtx SFs. Will then close out the remaining items.
Thanks,
Rajdeep

@youyingli
Copy link
Contributor

#1265 #1270 #1281 #1283 #1286 covered all UL18 meta-conditions updating. Close this PR, thanks!

@youyingli youyingli closed this Nov 29, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants