-
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
PUID UL18 for nanoAOD (backport) #32951
PUID UL18 for nanoAOD (backport) #32951
Conversation
A new Pull Request was created by @alefisico (Alejandro Gomez Espinosa) for CMSSW_10_6_X. It involves the following packages: PhysicsTools/NanoAOD @cmsbuild, @mariadalfonso, @gouskos, @fgolf can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
I'd say that we have to use |
sorry, where? |
@silviodonato @alefisico |
@alefisico we should have no change for the past UL NanoV8. This means no change if |
@@ -256,7 +258,10 @@ | |||
) | |||
for modifier in run2_miniAOD_80XLegacy, run2_nanoAOD_94X2016: | |||
modifier.toModify( jetTable.variables, jetId = Var("userInt('tightIdLepVeto')*4+userInt('tightId')*2+userInt('looseId')",int,doc="Jet ID flags bit1 is loose, bit2 is tight, bit3 is tightLepVeto")) | |||
run2_nanoAOD_102Xv1.toModify( jetTable.variables, puIdDisc = Var("userFloat('puId102XDisc')",float,doc="Pileup ID discriminant with 102X (2018) training",precision=10) ) | |||
run2_nanoAOD_102Xv1.toModify( jetTable.variables, puId = Var("userInt('pileupJetId:fullId')",int,doc="Pileup ID flags for pre-UL trainings") ) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
after #32960 it means that I should leave pu102XDisc
and pileupJetId:fullId
as it wasm and include:
run2_nanoAOD_devel.toModify( puIdDisc = Var("userFloat('puId106XUL18Disc')", float,doc="Pileup ID discriminant with 106X (2018) training",precision=10) )
run2_nanoAOD_devel.toModify( puId = Var("userInt('puId106XUL18Id')", int,doc="Pileup ID flags with 106X (2018) training") )
Is this correct @mariadalfonso ?
run2_nanoAOD_102Xv1.toModify( jetTable.variables, puIdDisc = Var("userFloat('puId102XDisc')",float,doc="Pileup ID discriminant with 102X (2018) training",precision=10) ) | ||
run2_nanoAOD_102Xv1.toModify( jetTable.variables, puId = Var("userInt('pileupJetId:fullId')",int,doc="Pileup ID flags for pre-UL trainings") ) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
you can change line 261 and 262 into
( (run2_nanoAOD_106Xv1 and ~run2_nanoAOD_devel) | run2_nanoAOD_102Xv1).toModify( jetTable.variables, puIdDisc = Var("userFloat('puId102XDisc')",float,doc="Pileup ID discriminant with 102X (2018) training",precision=10) )
( (run2_nanoAOD_106Xv1 and ~run2_nanoAOD_devel) | run2_nanoAOD_102Xv1).toModify( jetTable.variables, puId = Var("userInt('pileupJetId:fullId')",int,doc="Pileup ID flags for pre-UL trainings") )
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ok thanks, I'll commit a new version
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@alefisico
can you replace and
with &
?
so that we have
( (run2_nanoAOD_106Xv1 & ~run2_nanoAOD_devel) | run2_nanoAOD_102Xv1 ).toModify(
Pull request #32951 was updated. @cmsbuild, @mariadalfonso, @gouskos, @fgolf can you please check and sign again. |
please test |
-1 Failed Tests: Build BuildI found compilation warning when building: See details on the summary page. |
Pull request #32951 was updated. @cmsbuild, @mariadalfonso, @gouskos, @fgolf can you please check and sign again. |
please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-355152/13302/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
no differences are shown in the runTheMatrix. However I would have expected to see wf 1325.81 of type 106Xv1 -- no expected changes, thanks to this (run2_nanoAOD_106Xv1 and ~run2_nanoAOD_devel) Can you check locally ? |
actually, the |
sorry, I close it by mistake |
Pull request #32951 was updated. @cmsbuild, @mariadalfonso, @gouskos, @fgolf can you please check and sign again. |
please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-355152/13405/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
+xpog wf 1325.81 of type 106Xv1 untouched |
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_10_6_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_11_3_X is complete. This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @silviodonato, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
+1 |
PR description:
This is the backport of #32887
PR validation:
FYI: @camclean @mariadalfonso @gouskos