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
Fix for Puppi MET and MET significance compatibility between AOD and miniAOD #16140
Fix for Puppi MET and MET significance compatibility between AOD and miniAOD #16140
Conversation
Conflicts: PhysicsTools/PatAlgos/test/corMETFromMiniAOD.py
Conflicts: PhysicsTools/PatAlgos/test/corMETFromMiniAOD.py
A new Pull Request was created by @mmarionncern for CMSSW_8_1_X. It involves the following packages: PhysicsTools/PatAlgos @cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @slava77, @monttj, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are list here #13028 |
@mmarionncern please change the title of the PR to describe what it does |
@cmsbuild please test |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
@slava77 sorry for the title, I did not noticed it, corrected |
@slava77 the puppiMET is impacted when re-running the algorithm on miniAOD, I will clarify it in the description. |
@slava77 MET significance should increase a bit when producing miniAODs |
On 10/18/16 3:05 AM, mmarionncern wrote:
Is it because of statistical redefinition of significance in this PR?
|
@cmsbuild please test |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
There is a visible increase in CPU time in MET modules with significance computation enabled:
this increase is small enough to be tolerated |
+1 |
Comparison is ready @slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:
|
+1
|
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ | |||
computeMETSignificance = cms.bool(False), | |||
# significance computation parameters, not used | |||
# if the significance is not computed | |||
srcJets = cms.InputTag("selectedPatJets"), | |||
srcJets = cms.InputTag("cleanedPatJets"), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am wondering what would be the motivation to switch to "cleanedPatJets" from "selectedPatJets"
and it dose not need to be the same jet collection as we save at the end?
Regards,
Taejeong
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi @mmarionncern, @monttj - is this issue resolved?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@davidlange6 that change is validated for the MET group, waiting for @monttj red/green light on the explanation provided
@slava77 >> Is it because of statistical redefinition of significance in this PR? If MET is the same, what are the components that lead to increase of significance? This comes from the way the event components used in the covariance matrix computation (lepton, jets, unclustered particles) are disentangled. Compared to the previous version, there is a recovery of some soft particles associated to the leptons that are now correctly taken out of the unclsutered component. @monttj >> I am wondering what would be the motivation to switch to "cleanedPatJets" from "selectedPatJets" The cleanPatJet collection is the collection used in all MET related computation (type1 correction, etc), as those jets are cleaned from the lepton overlaps and are consistent with the kinematic selection made for the type1MET jet selection. For consistency, one should use that collection for the MET significance computation. |
@monttj |
seems we should move forward on this one. |
This PR improves the coherence between what is done for Puppi MET and the MET significance calculation at the miniAOD production level and recomputation on top of miniAODs.
Packages touched :
Changes :
Expected changes in data file contents :