pedestal subtraction for PCC luminosity

[benitezj]

PR description:

PCC luminosity is corrected for pedestal noise, mainly affecting low inst. lumi runs.
See presentation here (slide 4):
https://indico.cern.ch/event/845626/contributions/3551341/attachments/1901149/3138360/PCC_2017G.pdf

The code also includes a TGraph to check the pedestal value vs lumi section similar to the type1,2 corrections.

PR validation:

The code has been tested in local installation of 10_2_2, used for 2018 PCC luminosity.

[cmsbuild]

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

-code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-28452/12878

• This PR adds an extra 24KB to repository

Code check has found code style and quality issues which could be resolved by applying following patch(s)

• code-format:
  https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-28452/12878/code-format.patch
  e.g. curl https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-28452/12878/code-format.patch | patch -p1
  You can also run scram build code-format to apply code format directly

[cmsbuild]

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

-code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-28452/12886

• This PR adds an extra 24KB to repository

Code check has found code style and quality issues which could be resolved by applying following patch(s)

• code-format:
  https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-28452/12886/code-format.patch
  e.g. curl https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-28452/12886/code-format.patch | patch -p1
  You can also run scram build code-format to apply code format directly

[cmsbuild]

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

[christopheralanwest]

@pohsun These tests are run during the PR integration tests. The output is linked under "Unit Tests" here.

[benitezj]

Yes, the test was run locally then in the PR test. Please proceed. Thanks.

[fabiocos]

please test workflow 1020.0

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-run-pr-tests/3759/console Started: 2019/12/03 16:54

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 70f3465
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-efef91/3759/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison job queued.

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-efef91/3759/summary.html

@slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:

• /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/results/JR-comparison/PR-efef91/1020.0_AlCaLumiPixels2016H+AlCaLumiPixels2016H+TIER0EXPLP+ALCAEXPLP+ALCAHARVLP+TIER0PROMPTLP

Comparison Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 34
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2793840
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2793498
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 341
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 33 files compared)
• Checked 147 log files, 16 edm output root files, 34 DQM output files

[christopheralanwest]

+1

Thanks @fabiocos for finding the workflow that uses CorrPCCProducer

[cmsbuild]

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 will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @davidlange6, @slava77, @smuzaffar, @fabiocos (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[cmsbuild]

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 will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @davidlange6, @slava77, @smuzaffar, @fabiocos (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[fabiocos]

@benitezj in general it would be advisable to limit the use of git merge in preparing a PR, in particular your first commit could mimic an official merge. From what I can see anyway there should be no confusion in the branch history in my integration check:

*   903d345adafcc83653c5b154d67c64587be6928c (HEAD -> tmp/merge-test) Merged refs/pull/28452/head from repository cms-sw with cms-merge-topic
|\  
| * 70f3465dc5ed1df10aa1e6149a78e8189b55a415 (pull/28452_backup, cms-sw/refs/pull/28452/head) unit test for LumiAlCaRecoProducers
| *   21419581ea15b93179832a476707d69eeda5f7c3 .. Merge branch 'master' of github.com:cms-sw/cmssw
| |\  
| * | dc059848c73d9540de88439bf4d3e93f2ec887a9 fix code style
| * | fd78342229fd2109fdf3d9e864db9a3bef32b1c9 fix code style
| * |   083ab913300a4c436055bb8b98911910fc73ea64 update Merge branch 'master' of github.com:cms-sw/cmssw
| |\ \  
| * | | f7b3bd63c627d05d15471981e4e5fd24f19e8edf pedestal subtraction
| * | |   6088153661688efa1cb90784212e9b8960207df7 .. Merge branch 'master' of github.com:cms-sw/cmssw
| |\ \ \  
| * \ \ \   9ebd0abf008a608cea6dd61ae1b12ba58fe4d167 Merge branch 'master' of github.com:cms-sw/cmssw
| |\ \ \ \  
| * | | | | b2e324446d5b9b394dc0283f014403f4907060de pedestal subtraction
| * | | | |   f743bbf4261ee2785ba7afc592977f813f354c67 Merge branch 'master' of github.com:cms-sw/cmssw
| |\ \ \ \ \  
| * \ \ \ \ \   ab35e01174c1c0d4c3c55f75e9c77f6946c1165c Merge pull request #1 from cms-sw/master
| |\ \ \ \ \ \  
* | \ \ \ \ \ \   30a2ff8ff13aaa416259453b54ad0b62588edc91 (tag: CMSSW_11_1_X_2019-12-03-1100, official-cmssw/master, official-cmssw/HEAD, official-cmssw/CMSSW_11_1_X, from-CMSSW_11_1_X_2019-12-03-1100, CMSSW_11_1_X) Merge pull request #28501 from schneiml/dqm-local-bintobin

[fabiocos]

+1