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

Update SiPM parameters and fix a few bugs in hardcode conditions #16607

Merged
merged 6 commits into from Nov 16, 2016

Conversation

cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

The major change in this PR is new SiPM parameters (gain, photoelectronsToAnalog, dark current, crosstalk). We were informed about a month ago by the hardware experts that the SiPMs were run with an effective overvoltage of ~4.4V during test beam, but subsequent studies found that an overvoltage of 3V maximized signal to noise. Many SiPM parameters depend on voltage, so they need to be updated from the initial testbeam analysis to get better agreement with expected running conditions.

We were sent some pedestal runs from b904, which I analyzed (with the help of numerous experts) to get an average set of parameters. Slides detailing this analysis can be found here: sipm_condition_analysis.pdf.

I also fixed a few minor bugs:

  1. Way back in Configurable hardcode conditions for HCAL #13861, I dumped run2_mc parameters for HCAL and made per-subdetector averages to use as defaults for the hardcode conditions (for development purposes only). At the time, I didn't realize database pedestal values were in ADC, rather than the fC values assumed by the hardcode conditions. This PR adjusts the average values so they're actually in fC (using functionality from Hcal dump calibrations #16499). Again, this is for development only, and has no impact on any official workflows or results.
  2. Also back in Configurable hardcode conditions for HCAL #13861, I didn't account for depths 3 and 4 for HF when assigning gains, leading to a very minor discrepancy (depth 4 has gain=0.14 instead of 0.135). This has been fixed and will be updated in the database.

@abdoulline, I hope we can update all the database conditions at once...

@lihux25, it might be necessary to recheck the ZS thresholds with the new parameters. I would suggest not rerunning the whole study, but just check the existing "best" threshold you found, and then a slightly higher or lower value (to see how things change). To use the hardcode conditions in your config, merge this PR (in any recent IB) and then:

from SLHCUpgradeSimulations.Configuration.HCalCustoms import load_HcalHardcode
process = load_HcalHardcode(process)
process.es_hardcode.useHEUpgrade = cms.bool(True)
process.es_hardcode.useHFUpgrade = cms.bool(True)

Automatically ported from CMSSW_8_1_X #16526 (original by @kpedro88).

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor Author

A new Pull Request was created by @cmsbuild for CMSSW_9_0_X.

It involves the following packages:

CalibCalorimetry/HcalAlgos
CalibCalorimetry/HcalPlugins
SimCalorimetry/HcalSimProducers

@ghellwig, @civanch, @cerminar, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @mdhildreth, @mmusich, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@ghellwig, @mariadalfonso, @tocheng this is something you requested to watch as well.
@slava77, @smuzaffar you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here #13028

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

mmusich commented Nov 16, 2016

+1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor Author

cmsbuild commented Nov 16, 2016

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/16383/console

@davidlange6 davidlange6 merged commit 5b95302 into cms-sw:CMSSW_9_0_X Nov 16, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants