Run 1 reco tuning

[rovere]

This PR is meant to reproduce Run1-like tracking in CMSSW 75X. There are caveats, of course, and you should not expect to have exactly the same reconstruction code that we had in 53.

• All the architectural changes have been kept, like the sane usage of EDProducers instead of the insane use of ES quantities.
• In general all C++ related changes have been kept
• JetCore iteration and ClusterSplitting have been removed
• The order of the iterations has been restored
• The Muon specific iterations have been kept but, if you want, you can use the earlyGeneralTracks that are produced before running these iterations
• The usage of MVA has been disabled and the old selector cuts have been restored, taken from 5_3_27 (module human errors in diff-ing configuration files)
• PixelVertices and PixelTracks have been both restored

In order to use the Run1-like tracking, please either add:

--customise RecoTracker/Configuration/customiseForRunI.customiseForRunI

to cmsDriver.py command, or:

from RecoTracker.Configuration.customiseForRunI import customiseForRunI

#call to customisation function customiseForRunI imported from RecoTracker.Configuration.customiseForRunI
process = customiseForRunI(process)

directly into your final python configuration file.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @rovere (Marco Rovere) for CMSSW_7_5_X.

Run 1 reco tuning

It involves the following packages:

RecoTracker/Configuration
RecoTracker/IterativeTracking

@cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @nclopezo, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@ghellwig, @makortel, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @VinInn, @appeltel, @mschrode, @gpetruc, @cerati, @dgulhan, @venturia this is something you requested to watch as well.
You can sign-off by replying to this message having '+1' in the first line of your reply.
You can reject by replying to this message having '-1' in the first line of your reply.
If you are a L2 or a release manager you can ask for tests by saying 'please test' in the first line of a comment.
@nclopezo you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[slava77]

@cmsbuild please test

[slava77]

We need to discuss if this stays as an experimental customize or if it becomes a regularly tested setup (with corresponding relvals etc).
Also, if it's beyond experimental setup, it will need to be made era-aware

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[rovere]

Ciao Slava,
I agree. Let's first see if this turns out to be somehow useful to anybody. If yes I can make it era-aware, with some guidance.
As for testing, unless you activate it, I hope there will be no changes 😃

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: ed0a3c1
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-8691/7068/summary.html

[slava77]

these were not in RunI (53X).

[rovere]

Ciao Slava,
I am not sure what you mean here: which line are you referring to, exactly?
As I mentioned in the comment, this is not meant to be a 1:1 replica of RunI tracking, but the best approximation we could have, including all C++ and class layout changes that have been done in between.

[slava77]

I mean the muonSeededTracksInOutSelector

[rovere]

Ciao Slava,
getting rid of them would have been more work than added value, I fear. As I wrote in the initial comment, if you want to ignore them, you can use the earlyGeneralTrack collection, which is produced before running the muon seeded iterations.

[slava77]

That's fine, I understand.

[slava77]

+1

for #8691 ed0a3c1
I checked (in CMSSW_7_5_0_pre2 /test area test8691/) that it runs, to see what the impact is for the PU35@25ns scenario.

The total time per event increase from 17 s to 28 s.

• about + 10 s is from increase in time in tobTecStepTrackCandidates and pixelLessStepTrackCandidates
• a few other modules (pf, muon etc) driven by track multiplicity account for +1 -- +2 s
• jetcore and other removed sequences account for 1.9 s

no surprises here

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_7_5_X IBs unless changes (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @nclopezo, @ktf, @smuzaffar

[davidlange6]

+1