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

Jet Energy Scale systematics can be split by sources and grouped #750

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: heppy_94X_dev
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

GaelTouquet
Copy link
Contributor

For the H2TauTau analysis, JES is split by sources and grouped as is explained here.
I have implemented the possibility of doing so in the jet recalibrator. Maybe this could be useful in other analysis too.
This has not been fully validated yet but will be within a week, I will add a comment here when it will be so.

@gpetruc gpetruc added this to the Heppy 94X milestone Apr 12, 2019
@gpetruc gpetruc changed the base branch from heppy_94X_dev to heppy94 April 15, 2019 12:12
@gpetruc gpetruc changed the base branch from heppy94 to heppy_94X_dev April 15, 2019 12:12
@GaelTouquet
Copy link
Contributor Author

I have committed a fix for the requested change, but I haven't completely synced with other groups on the grouped systematics yet. It might not come from this code but from the analysis part, it is still under investigation. As said before, I will sync this ASAP and confirm here that it gives a satisfactory result.

@GaelTouquet
Copy link
Contributor Author

Just a quick update : I have checked the code with an other group and everything seems to be alright but there is still disagreement on the synchronization of a test sample. Someone from the group agreed to do some scrutinized parallel testing, but he will only be available to do so beginning of next week.
Sorry to keep you waiting

@GaelTouquet
Copy link
Contributor Author

We have reached synchronization! The group I was syncing with had overwritten pointers...
Although we haven't decided if we should keep the len(sources) == 1 case as was before, leading to the inversion of up and down shifts in this case.
I suggest to merge this the way it is and I will find a workaround in our analysis code if needed.
Thank you for your patience.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants