Skip to content
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

Mass and momentum smearing, moller vertices, analysis config updates #199

Open
wants to merge 30 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

alspellm
Copy link
Contributor

  1. I've added the p smearing seed flag to the analysis config.

  2. I added invariant mass smearing directly to the vertex object invariant mass.
    *THE SMEARING IS STILL NOT APPLIED CORRECTLY IN THE CUTFLOW
    **The analysis selection is broken into three stages. Smearing is applied in each stage, because the tracks do not persist
    **between each stage. But there are momentum cuts in preselection. So this results in events being smeared in
    **momentum AFTER momentum cuts have been applied. Need to fix this...

  3. I added in a way to process moller vertices in the NewVertexAnaProcessor.

  4. I've made some changes to the analysis configuration script that I use for simps. It mostly involves changes to the way various track/cluster corrections are applied. They can now be loaded in from a json file.

  5. The newest version of hps-java master adds the bfieldY at SvtCenter into TrackData. I had to update the code that checks the TrackData object structure so that it allows for that additional float index.

…hat, and confirmed it gives the correct moller mass after smearing. Also updated track smearing to modify the track object saved to the particle, so the smearing persists
utils/src/TrackSmearingTool.cxx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
utils/src/TrackSmearingTool.cxx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
{
"corrections": {
"track_time": -5.5,
"track_cluster_dt": -0.7,
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As far as I can tell, this correction is never applied anywhere.

  • This JSON is loaded into tbc_configs_
  • tbc_configs_ is copied into trackBiasCorrections_
  • Track::applyCorrections is used for all entries in trackBiasCorrections_ but that function only does anything with "track_time" and "track_z0" and ignores everything else
  • Neither tbc_configs_ nor trackBiasCorrections_ are referenced anywhere else

Perhaps not applying this correction is okay? I don't expect a sub-ns shift in the difference between the cluster and track times to significantly affect the cutflow, but - for confusion purposes - it'd be better to know if it should be applied.

alspellm and others added 7 commits June 20, 2024 07:35
…r cleaning since I was at it...even though its messy, sorry
…rack persist. Since there are some small track bias corrections in the ana processor, these were being applied in preselection, the track was permantently updated, then they were applied again at the other selection stages. So I moved this ele->setTrack outside of TrackSmearingTool, and removed the duplicate track bias corrections
Comment on lines +453 to +454
//After all modifications to the track are made, update the memory address that the particle gets the track from
//with the modified track, that way changes here persist throughout this processor
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just to be clear, the Particle holds a copy of the Track and CalCluster associated with it.

This is important to emphasize since the ele_trk and ele.getTrack() could evolve differently if only one is edited.

Comment on lines +21 to +22
smearing_histo_top_ = (TH1D*) smearingfile_->Get((tracks+"_p_vs_nHits_hh_smearing"+hsuffix+"_top").c_str());
smearing_histo_bot_ = (TH1D*) smearingfile_->Get((tracks+"_p_vs_nHits_hh_smearing"+hsuffix+"_bot").c_str());
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This makes the old smearing file unusable right? I think we should either remove the old one or have the smearing tool support a file like the old one where the top and bottom are not separate.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yeah good point, I don't think there's a reason to keep the old file around

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants