Exotica dqm updated histograms

[aescalante]

Updated charge cuts to deal with 0T conditions, updated range of some histograms, updated constrains in dijet and diphoton histograms to reduce background and added histograms to monitor dijet an wprime tails

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @aescalante (Alberto Escalante del Valle) for CMSSW_7_4_X.

Exotica dqm updated histograms

It involves the following packages:

DQM/Physics

@cmsbuild, @danduggan, @deguio can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@rappoccio 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.
@Degano you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[deguio]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 27fa47a
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-11216/8022/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-11216/8022/summary.html

[deguio]

ciao @aescalante
are the corresponding PR for 75 and 76 there?
thanks,
F.

[aescalante]

I have just created two additional pull request for 75 and 76 with the propagated changes. #11357 #11358

[deguio]

+1

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_7_4_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_7_6_X is complete. This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[davidlange6]

+1

[davidlange6]

it looks like the GT used by the Tier0 does not include the JEC needed by this PR. The AlCa team does not have the conditions needed, so for the moment, we will revert this PR.

[aescalante]

I can remove the JEC if needed to avoid this kind of problems.
Alberto.

[aescalante]

note that #11357 #11358 are committed on top of the changes in this PR, so they should be reverted/cancelled in that case.

[diguida]

@aescalante
I see that here you changed the quantity requested to the JEC from L1FastL2L3 for PF jets with anti-kT 0.4 to L1FastjetCorrector for PF charge-hadron subtracted jets with anti-kT 0.4. Most likely, they are not provided by the current JEC in the GT.
I have dumped the values in prompt and re-reco GT:

• in prompt, still containing old JEC, where the crash happens, I find these keys:

L2Relative=1,
L3Absolute=2,
L2L3Residual=8,
Uncertainty=9,
L1FastJet = 10,

• in re-reco, updated to the new JEC for Summer15, where the crash did not happen in the release integration, I find:

L2Relative=1,
L3Absolute=2,
L2L3Residual=8,
L1FastJet = 10,

So, apart from the uncertainty, the same keys are available in both payloads.

Am I missing something?

@mmusich this is something you might want to watch as well

[aescalante]

Thanks for the help @diguida

Yes I changed that because at some point I had some problems running locally in data and I thought that was problematic and the change was the solution, but it seems that the proposed change is problematic.

So I can go back to the "old" configuration if its ok or I can also drop the JEC since Exotica is not validating the JEC and the validation can work without them.

Alberto

[diguida]

@aescalante
As found by @blinkseb , it is an issue with python configuration.
Please follow the discussion in https://hypernews.cern.ch/HyperNews/CMS/get/calibrations/2028.html

[deguio]

@aescalante
while the discussion is ongoing:

• I have removed my 'plus1' in PR PR #11216 in 7_4_X propagated to 7_5_X, Exotica DQM updated histograms #11357 since wasn't merged yet
• please revert PR #11216 in 7_4_X propagated to 7_6_X, Exotica DQM Updated histograms #11358 . there must be a button on the bottom of the PR that does the trick.

for the reverted PRs you will need to resubmit them again with the fix on top.
thanks,
F.

[aescalante]

ciao @deguio
Done, I have reverted #11358 I will make new PRs once there is an outcome of the discussion.
Alberto.

[aescalante]

Hi all, finally how can we proceed with this PR?? Should I remove the JEC from the PR or change the way I get them (to the way I used to do it before)?

Alberto.