Conversation
|
type ngt |
|
cms-bot internal usage |
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-50588/48773
|
|
A new Pull Request was created by @bfonta for master. It involves the following packages:
@Martin-Grunewald, @Moanwar, @civanch, @cmsbuild, @ctarricone, @davidlange6, @fabiocos, @ftenchini, @gabrielmscampos, @jfernan2, @kpedro88, @mandrenguyen, @mdhildreth, @mmusich, @nothingface0, @rseidita, @srimanob can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
HLTrigger/Configuration/python/HLT_75e33/sequences/HLTTICLLocalRecoSequence_cfi.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
bfonta
force-pushed
the
feature/hlt_ticl_barrel
branch
from
1a8bac5 to
e86618e
Compare
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-50588/48774
|
|
Pull request #50588 was updated. @Martin-Grunewald, @Moanwar, @civanch, @cmsbuild, @ctarricone, @davidlange6, @fabiocos, @ftenchini, @gabrielmscampos, @jfernan2, @kpedro88, @mandrenguyen, @mdhildreth, @mmusich, @nothingface0, @rseidita, @srimanob can you please check and sign again. |
HLTrigger/Configuration/python/HLT_75e33/modules/hltBarrelLayerClusters_cfi.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
test parameters:
|
bfonta
force-pushed
the
feature/hlt_ticl_barrel
branch
from
e86618e to
bbc374d
Compare
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-50588/48778
|
|
Pull request #50588 was updated. @Martin-Grunewald, @Moanwar, @civanch, @cmsbuild, @ctarricone, @davidlange6, @fabiocos, @ftenchini, @gabrielmscampos, @jfernan2, @kpedro88, @mandrenguyen, @mdhildreth, @mmusich, @nothingface0, @rseidita, @srimanob can you please check and sign again. |
|
@cmsbuild, please test |
|
+1 Size: This PR adds an extra 132KB to repository HLT P2 Timing: chart Comparison SummarySummary:
|
cmsbuild
added
operations-approved
tests-approved
and removed
operations-pending
tests-started
labels
| # from Configuration.StandardSequences.Validation_cff import prevalidation | ||
| # ImportError: cannot import name 'prevalidation' from partially initialized module 'Configuration.StandardSequences.Validation_cff' (most likely due to a circular import) (/shared/CMSSW_15_1_X_2025-07-16-2300/src/Configuration/StandardSequences/python/Validation_cff.py) | ||
| hltprevalidation = cms.Sequence( cms.SequencePlaceholder("mix") * globalPrevalidation * hltassociation * metPreValidSeq * jetPreValidSeq ) | ||
| phase2_common.toReplaceWith(hltprevalidation, hltprevalidation.copyAndExclude([cms.SequencePlaceholder("mix"),globalPrevalidation,metPreValidSeq,jetPreValidSeq])) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why do we need this back and forth?
Basicaly hltprevalidation == hltassociation no?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, but only when we are running a Phase-2 workflow. I'm mimicking the approach used in Configuration/StandardSequences/python/Validation_cff.py here for prevalidation.
|
+simulation |
| @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ | |||
| recHits = cms.InputTag("hltParticleFlowRecHitECALL1Seeded"), | |||
| plugin = cms.PSet( | |||
| outlierDeltaFactor = cms.double(2.7 * 0.0175), | |||
| kappa = cms.double(3.5), | |||
| kappa = cms.double(1), | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just checking, were those numbers, and also the ones later in hltBarrelLayerClustersHB_cfi.py, changed intentionally? If so, maybe a brief note in the description would be helpful.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
After chatting with @brusale, we realized that those numbers had not been verified at HLT. I am thus using the numbers currently used at offline; they can be optimized at a later time, and specifically for HLT. To give an example, the kappa value used for the HCAL led to the almost full absence of clusters in HCAL.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've added a note in the description.
5 participants
PR description:
Enables the validation of TICL-barrel at HLT as introduced in #47859 for the offline reconstruction. Logically follows #48565. The HLT configuration is now using the same parameters as used for the offline clustering.
Results are stored under
HLT/BarrelCalorimeters/BarrelValidator/.This PR does not include a "validation of the validation": I checked if the plots were created and that most of them were not empty, but I did not try to assess the correctness of the results, nor did I attempted to optimize CLUE's configuration at HLT.
PR validation:
Tested with the
34434.77_TTbar_14TeV+Run4D121_NGTScoutingworkflow:NEVENTS=100 cmsDriver.py TTbar_14TeV_TuneCP5_cfi -s GEN,SIM -n ${NEVENTS} --conditions auto:phase2_realistic_T35 --beamspot DBrealisticHLLHC --datatier GEN-SIM --eventcontent FEVTDEBUG --geometry ExtendedRun4D121 --era \ Phase2C22I13M9 --relval 9000,100 --fileout file:step1.root cmsDriver.py step2 -s DIGI:pdigi_valid,L1TrackTrigger,L1,L1P2GT,DIGI2RAW,HLT:NGTScouting,VALIDATION:@hltValidation --conditions auto:phase2_realistic_T35 --datatier GEN-SIM-DIGI-RAW,DQMIO -n ${NEVENTS} --even\ tcontent FEVTDEBUGHLT,DQMIO --geometry ExtendedRun4D121 --era Phase2C22I13M9 --procModifiers ngtScouting,ticl_barrel --customise SLHCUpgradeSimulations/Configuration/aging.customise_aging_1000 --filein file:st\ ep1.root --fileout file:step2.root cmsDriver.py step3 -s HARVESTING:@hltValidation --conditions auto:phase2_realistic_T35 --mc --geometry ExtendedRun4D121 --scenario pp --filetype DQM --era Phase2C22I13M9 --procModifiers ngtScouting,ticl_barre\ l -n ${NEVENTS} --filein file:step2_inDQM.root --fileout file:step3.rootNote: The configuration of CLUE at HLT was set to match the configuration currently in place for the offline reconstruction, since the configuration so far had not been verified. The configuration at HLT can be optimized at a later time. To give an example, the kappa value used for the HCAL led to the almost full absence of clusters in HCAL