Disabling FLUKA background + Enabling GEM hits into the displaced STA muon reco #18456
Conversation
|
A new Pull Request was created by @calabria (Cesare Calabria) for master. It involves the following packages: RecoMuon/Configuration @perrotta, @civanch, @mdhildreth, @cmsbuild, @kpedro88, @slava77, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here #13028 |
|
it could be a good opportunity to replace |
|
.. the last comment was for SimMuon/RPCDigitizer/python/muonRPCDigis_cfi.py |
|
@cmsbuild please test |
|
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
|
please test |
|
-1 Tested at: 2ff5539 You can see the results of the tests here: I found follow errors while testing this PR Failed tests: AddOn
I found errors in the following addon tests: cmsDriver.py RelVal -s L1REPACK:Full2015Data --data --scenario=HeavyIons -n 10 --conditions auto:run2_hlt_HIon --relval 9000,50 --datatier "RAW" --eventcontent RAW --customise=HLTrigger/Configuration/CustomConfigs.L1T --era Run2_2016,Run2_HI --magField 38T_PostLS1 --fileout file:RelVal_Raw_HIon_DATA.root --filein /store/hidata/HIRun2015/HIHardProbes/RAW-RECO/HighPtJet-PromptReco-v1/000/263/689/00000/1802CD9A-DDB8-E511-9CF9-02163E0138CA.root : FAILED - time: date Tue Apr 25 15:31:14 2017-date Tue Apr 25 15:21:23 2017 s - exit: 23552 |
|
Comparison job queued. |
|
Pull request #18456 was updated. @perrotta, @civanch, @mdhildreth, @cmsbuild, @kpedro88, @slava77, @davidlange6 can you please check and sign again. |
| simMuonRPCDigis.InputCollection = 'MuonSimHitsMuonRPCHits' | ||
| fastSim.toModify(simMuonRPCDigis, InputCollection = 'MuonSimHitsMuonRPCHits') | ||
|
|
||
| simMuonRPCDigisPhaseII = cms.EDProducer("RPCandIRPCDigiProducer", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Better to start this variable name with an underscore, so there won't be an unnecessary process.simMuonRPCDigisPhaseII object.
|
@calabria should this PR go on the list of things needed for the TDR? |
|
Pull request #18456 was updated. @perrotta, @civanch, @mdhildreth, @cmsbuild, @kpedro88, @slava77, @davidlange6 can you please check and sign again. |
|
@kpedro88 yes it is needed for the Muon TDR |
|
Comparison job queued. |
|
Comparison is ready Comparison Summary:
|
|
@calabria
Please comment |
|
Maybe "ideal" here is a bit misleading. For ideal I mean "no neutron background" and "no muon system aging". When present, we will simulate the neutron background with GEANT, and all the muon detectors will share the same approach. It will be mixed together with the PU. Here I am disabling the neutron background description for the GEM/ME0 and RPC subsystems, the only muon detectors adding neutron background as random uncorrelated hits at digi step (based on the FLUKA results). If we simulate the neutron background with GEANT this is no more needed, when we go without neutron background this is also no more needed, so I am switching it off by default. Concerning the neutron backgrond with GEANT, it is enabled by this customization function: https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/master/SimG4Core/Application/python/NeutronBGforMuons_cff.py while the correct mixing of the neutron background hits for the muon system will be assured using the following customization function: @pietverwilligen , please, correct me if I am wrong. |
|
On 4/26/17 12:08 PM, Cesare Calabria wrote:
Here I am disabling the neutron background description for the GEM and
RPC subsystems
what about the change in
SimMuon/GEMDigitizer/python/muonME0DigisPreReco_cfi.py?
You didn't mention ME0 in your last message.
Does your description of the intent also mean that the standard relvals
and TDR samples will have no neutron background
and there will be some private samples or special requests for
production with neutral backgrounds?
Is there a matrix relval workflow(s) that use the setup that you describe?
We should have at least a basic matrix relval workflow for this.
|
|
Yes, of course also ME0. TDR samples with high statistics for the physics studies will not have any aging or neutron background. There will be a small campaign for the muon perfomance studies where we will include aging and neutron background. There is no workflow at the moment I will introduce it, but I will not include it in this PR, it is better this proceed as it is because for the physics samples we need to disable what will not be used and enable the use of the GEM/ME0 hits in the displaced sta muon reconstruction. |
|
+1 |
|
On 4/27/17 2:16 AM, Cesare Calabria wrote:
Yes, of course also ME0. TDR samples with high statistics for the
physics studies will not have any aging or neutron background. There
will be a small campaign for the muon perfomance studies where we will
include aging and neutron background. There is no workflow at the moment
I will introduce it, but I will not include it in this PR, it is better
this proceed as it is because for the physics samples
we need to disable
what will not be used
funny perspective on physics contribution that's expected in PU samples
in reality
to be considered as not used (or disabled as not wanted)
Recall that the default workflows will likely be done with shortened PU
window.
So, whatever neutrons the standard GEANT setup could have had (given the
normal 500 ns time cutoff),
we'd have much fewer. IIRC, this was estimated to be as much as a half
of the neutron flux/impact with the 12-wide PU window.
and enable the use of the GEM/ME0 hits in the
displaced sta muon reconstruction.
This one is correct and I will sign off for reco shortly.
…
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#18456 (comment)>, or
mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEdcbi1R_QlC0W0EuaNfYGYvRW6qwq3Yks5r0FzQgaJpZM4NHRHP>.
|
|
@slava77 , simulation of neutron background with FLUKA and Geant4 are two different things. The advantage of Geant4 that hits are simulated directly, time window for this simulation is 10 seconds (needed to integrate all thermal neutrons). FLUKA do things differently, as I understand, the radiation activity is simulated nearly in the same way as Geant4, radiation is stored per absorber volumes than parametrized, than somehow parametrized radioactivity added on top of digi step. In both cases not pileup should be added but total neutron radioactive isotope fluxes accumulated over much larger time window. It is known from ATLAS and also from CMS study that these two are in reasonable agreement with the data. |
|
On 4/27/17 6:31 AM, Vladimir Ivantchenko wrote:
@slava77 <https://github.com/slava77> , simulation of neutron background
with FLUKA and Geant4 are two different things. The advantage of Geant4
that hits are simulated directly, time window for this simulation is 10
seconds (needed to integrate all thermal neutrons). FLUKA do things
differently, as I understand, the radiation activity is simulated nearly
in the same way as Geant4, radiation is stored per absorber volumes than
parametrized, than somehow parametrized radioactivity added on top of
digi step.
In both cases not pileup should be added but total neutron radioactive
isotope fluxes accumulated over much larger time window. It is known
from ATLAS and also from CMS study that these two are in reasonable
agreement with the data.
Hi Vladimir,
Are you describing the default simulation workflow setup (my concern in
this thread)
or the special physics list and settings to be used in neutron
background studies or a limited set of samples?
I may have missed that standard sim has switched to 10s window now.
Please clarify.
Thank you.
… —
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#18456 (comment)>, or
mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEdcbqAW83ytHQJrwl-lC36Q44eJtkUUks5r0JjJgaJpZM4NHRHP>.
|
|
@slava77 , of course, a special PhysicsList with thermal neutrons and extended time windows are needed , there is a custom fragment for the SIM step. |
|
Probably I am not understanding the comments, anyway I believe it would be also funny if only part of the muon system simulates the neutron background (using FLUKA) and the rest does not, bacause CSC and DT are not simulating any neutron background. For this reason we decided to rely only on the common approach offered by the GEANT simulation and to switch off the random hits added only for GEM, ME0 and RPC. Concerning the second part of the comment after the customization I pointed out above the time cut will be set at 10s and for the muon peformance we are requesting to have a window of [-8,+8] (hopefully). |
Anyways, that's not a part of the reco review discussion. |
|
+1
For the expected changes in reco (here and below, looking at jenkins D8 plots) The plots below characterize changes related to digi settings modifications. gem rechits are now just signal this leads to a reduction in the number of segments by about 2 Similar, for ME0 signal hits are just at t=0 The number of ME0 segments is also down by a factor of 2 Both ME0 and GEM local recos apparently have a large sensitivity to the neutron background (even in the random coincidences generated here). The number of RPC hits also goes down, by less than a factor of 2 (the backgrounds were not that large apparently) the number of non-tracker (and non-global) muons is down substantively |
|
+1 |
cmsbuild
added
fully-signed
upgrade-approved
and removed
pending-signatures
upgrade-pending
labels
|
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @Muzaffar, @davidlange6, @smuzaffar |
As discussed yesterday at the GMM when running in indeal conditions, all the Muon detectors have to be ideal, so this PR switches off the neutron background description for GE1/1, GE2/1, ME0 and RPC (only in Phase2) and make it the default.
This PR enables also the use of the GE1/1, GE2/1, ME0 hits in the displaced standalone muon reconstruction, missing before by mistake.
@jshlee @kpedro88 @HuguesBrun @drkovalskyi