-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.4k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Adopt HFSignalAsymmetry flag in HF PFRecHit cleaning #33520
Conversation
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33520/22277
|
A new Pull Request was created by @hatakeyamak (Kenichi Hatakeyama) for master. It involves the following packages: Configuration/DataProcessing @perrotta, @silviodonato, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @slava77, @jpata, @qliphy, @fabiocos, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
@cmsbuild please test |
cc @cms-sw/hgcal-dpg-l2 |
-1 Failed Tests: UnitTests Unit TestsI found errors in the following unit tests: ---> test TestConfigDP had ERRORS Comparison SummarySummary:
|
looks like a wrong DPG was tagged. @cms-sw/hcal-dpg-l2 |
Kenichi has mentioned in the PR header/preamble a discussion with me and Alexander Toropin in #27767 Concening a particular aspect of the HBHENegativeNoise flag inactivation", I've suggested its removal Now, a propos de Unit Test failure on HBHENegativeNoise flag SeverityLevel modification - |
IIUC, the flag is already set to severity 12 in
and it looks like the cmssw/RecoLocalCalo/HcalRecAlgos/python/RemoveAddSevLevel.py Lines 89 to 92 in bdee9b1
So, I guess either this part needs a fix or there should be a RemoveFlag first. Perhaps a cleaner solution still is to use era/modifier in Configuration/StandardSequences/python/Reconstruction_Data_cff.py |
Sorry. I am a little behind. I think (i) i.e. .RemoveFlag() should work (and local test looked good), but i wasn't convinced yet that it is the cleanest thing to do. So, I will think more, and a suggestion is certainly welcome. |
@slava77 In a very much similar situation "HBHEFlatNoise" flag is also assigned 12 in Reconstruction_Data_cff.py
And then changed back to 8 in RecoTLR.py and propagated customisePostEra_Run2_2017 -> customisePostEra_Run2_2018 -> customisePostEra_Run3 :
And there were/is no issue (?) I think Reconstruction_Data_cff.py may not be the best location for era-related modifications, as all those are present in RecoTLR.py (?) |
It's likely that in cmssw/RecoLocalCalo/HcalRecAlgos/python/RemoveAddSevLevel.py Lines 89 to 92 in bdee9b1
the if len(Flags)==0 : is already false and ChanStat is never checked.
The error message in the test is pretty clear
It would be nicer to fix RemoveAddSevLevel.py |
@slava77 |
I can propose to drop I'm fine to have |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33520/22379
|
Pull request #33520 was updated. @perrotta, @silviodonato, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @slava77, @jpata, @qliphy, @fabiocos, @davidlange6 can you please check and sign again. |
@cmsbuild please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-b6c772/14710/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
Only 2017/2018 data exhibit some small PFlow -> downstream changes. |
+reconstruction
|
+1 |
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 be automatically merged. |
PR description:
HFSignalAsymmetry flag was introduced after the HF phase1 upgrade for noise flagging by HCAL DPG, but it was never adopted in PF cleaning (*). This PR adds this flag for HF PFRecHit cleaning.
(*) https://indico.cern.ch/event/944298/timetable/#10-pf-noise-cleaning-for-hcal
Also following discussions on #27767 and a request from @abdoulline we put the HBHENegativeNoise flag ineffective starting from Run 3 (this flag won't be created from Run 3, so it was not really necessary, but this change was made to avoid potential confusions).
PR validation:
We don't expect a large change by addition of HFSignalAsymmetry to HF PFRecHit cleaning. As seen in: https://indico.cern.ch/event/1027487/#36-hf-noise-flagging-for-pf, we do not see any concerning changes. If we may say, slight reduction in MET in MET PD which is expected to include some high MET events due to noise is probably a positive effect.
if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:
This is not a backport.
@bendavid @laurenhay @marksan87 @abdoulline @toropin