Use pdigi_hi_nogen for HI MC wfs

[mandrenguyen]

PR description:

This PR switches to the DIGI:pdigi_hi_nogen for heavy-ion MC RelVal workflows.

Back in #24199 the option DIGI:pdigi_hi_nogen was introduced.
The previously used pdigi_hi option adds some heavy-ion generator level quantities, such as npart and ncoll, to the output.
The 'nogen' extension prevents gen collections from being reproduced in the digi step.
Most heavy-ion MC requests use an event overlay workflow, with a crossing frame to mix the gen info from the signal and background events.
If the gen info is reproduced at the digi step, we lose the gen info from the background event.
The pdigi_hi_nogen has long been the default option in official MC, but we neglected to switch to this option in the RelVal workflows, which occasionally leads to confusion.
This PR fixes that.

2nd commit: A new validation sequence for the heavy-ion event overlay workflow is added. It ignores genParticles that are not from collisionID = 0 (the signal event)

PR validation:

Tested on wf 159 and 301

if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:

No backport needed

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-35028/24886

• This PR adds an extra 44KB to repository

• There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:

  • File Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/relval_steps.py modified in PR(s): NANO: rework for Prompt (part3) #34714, Add SiStripCalCosmics ALCANANO #34985

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @mandrenguyen (Matthew Nguyen) for master.

It involves the following packages:

• Configuration/PyReleaseValidation (pdmv, upgrade)

@jordan-martins, @chayanit, @bbilin, @wajidalikhan, @kpedro88, @cmsbuild, @AdrianoDee, @srimanob, @kskovpen can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @Martin-Grunewald, @fabiocos, @slomeo this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[AdrianoDee]

test parameters:

• workflows = 150.0,159.0,300.0,310.0

[AdrianoDee]

please test

[srimanob]

test parameters:

• workflows = 150.0,159.0,300.0,310.0

[srimanob]

@cmsbuild please test

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-5de25b/18057/summary.html
COMMIT: 1f35810
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_1_X_2021-08-25-2300/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/35028/18057/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

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

• /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-5de25b/300.0_Pyquen_GammaJet_pt20_2760GeV+Pyquen_GammaJet_pt20_2760GeV+DIGIHIMIX+RECOHIMIX+HARVESTHI2018PPRECO
• /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-5de25b/310.0_Pyquen_GammaJet_pt20_2760GeV_2021+Pyquen_GammaJet_pt20_2760GeV_2021+DIGIHI2021MIX+RECOHI2021MIX+HARVESTHI2021PPRECO

Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• Reco comparison results: 16 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 39
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3000352
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 9322
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2991008
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 38 files compared)
• Checked 165 log files, 37 edm output root files, 39 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[srimanob]

@mandrenguyen
I see a lot of failure coming from wfs 312,
https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/master/Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/relval_pileup.py#L25
which uses DIGIHI2021MIX.

Could you please go through the report,
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/baseLineComparisons/CMSSW_12_1_X_2021-08-25-2300+5de25b/45022/validateJR.html
and confirm if this is expected.

Thanks.

[mandrenguyen]

@srimanob I checked that wf 312 runs at the prompt without issue. I looked thru the log files, but I'm not spotting anything relevant. Are you able to see where the code is crashing?

[srimanob]

Hi @mandrenguyen
Oh, I mean fails in PR test report. I just want to confirm with you that the use of pdigi_hi_nogen is the source of the fail comparison on that specific workflows.

[mandrenguyen]

@srimanob Ah, so it's not a crash. The pdigi_hi_nogen flag will change the genParticles in mixing worksflows, which are those that use --pileup HiMix in the DIGI step 312 is such an example. I can't tell from the monitoring pages that you point to whether these changes come from changes to the genParticles.

[srimanob]

There are 2 possibilities here. Since DIGI:pdigi_hi_nogen is available since 2018, #24199, we can either

• merge this PR and run high statistics test in the next pre-release
• or ask PdmV to submit relvals with CMSSW_12_1_0_pre2 with customization and check.

Since the effect on this PR is very limited to HI GEN MC, I would prefer to merge it, and try to run at the next pre-release. Do you agree @qliphy @perrotta @cms-sw/pdmv-l2 ?

[srimanob]

+Upgrade

[qliphy]

please test
re-test

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-5de25b/20525/summary.html
COMMIT: e8d493e
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_2_X_2021-11-14-0000/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/35028/20525/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

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

• /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-5de25b/300.0_Pyquen_GammaJet_pt20_2760GeV+Pyquen_GammaJet_pt20_2760GeV+DIGIHIMIX+RECOHIMIX+HARVESTHI2018PPRECO
• /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-5de25b/310.0_Pyquen_GammaJet_pt20_2760GeV_2021+Pyquen_GammaJet_pt20_2760GeV_2021+DIGIHI2021MIX+RECOHI2021MIX+HARVESTHI2021PPRECO

Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• Reco comparison results: 1297 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 42
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2902040
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 8787
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2893231
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 41 files compared)
• Checked 177 log files, 37 edm output root files, 42 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: found differences in 1 / 41 workflows

[jfernan2]

+1

[kskovpen]

+1

[perrotta]

Looking at the comparison plots there are quite a lot of differences, and I assume they are kind of expected.
I would agree with what @srimanob wrote above, i.e. "Since the effect on this PR is very limited to HI GEN MC, I would prefer to merge it, and try to run at the next pre-release".
Therefore, if there are no counterindications (and since it has been fully signed I assume there are not) I would merge this PR so that it can be fully validated in pre3.

[mandrenguyen]

@perrotta This should only have changed gen quantities. I'm a bit at a loss as to how we can have changes to reco quantities.

[perrotta]

@perrotta This should only have changed gen quantities. I'm a bit at a loss as to how we can have changes to reco quantities.

Uhm, since you touched the digi step I assumed that it would have forcibly propagated to reco as well...
But if you say now that it was not expected, then this has to be understood, and also fixed if needed!

[mandrenguyen]

Ah, I have updated the release for the pileup dataset. So that's where this effect comes from.

[perrotta]

Ah, I have updated the release for the pileup dataset. So that's where this effect comes from.

Indeed, that was my understanding
Therefore you confirm that the changes look reasonable, given that?

[mandrenguyen]

Yes, I would say so. Sorry for the noise.

[perrotta]

+operations

[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. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[qliphy]

+1