-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.3k
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
Logic bug in CutBasedElectronID #46865
Comments
assign RecEgamma/ElectronIdentification |
cms-bot internal usage |
A new Issue was created by @Dr15Jones. @Dr15Jones, @antoniovilela, @makortel, @mandrenguyen, @rappoccio, @sextonkennedy, @smuzaffar can you please review it and eventually sign/assign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
assign RecoEgamma/ElectronIdentification |
New categories assigned: reconstruction @jfernan2,@mandrenguyen you have been requested to review this Pull request/Issue and eventually sign? Thanks |
The bug was introduced 14 years ago during a fix of a different logical bug |
looks like version 'V05' was the largest version number 14 years ago. Given the 'default' appears to be an empty version, which then defaults to the behavior matching the largest known version, it shows why the bug associated to version 'V00' and 'V01' was not noticed. |
@SanghyunKo @cochando as L3 Reco EGamma conveners, can you please comment on the solution? Thanks |
So the affect of the bug is: The value of The value of sigmaee = electron->sigmaEtaEta(); while for V01 it was supposed to be double sigmaee = electron->sigmaIetaIeta(); while the bug makes them both sigmaee = electron->sigmaIetaIeta(); which is fine for V01 but wrong for V00. |
From what I've seen briefly, this module and the similar one mentioned in issue #46868 seem to be outdated; as far as I can tell, these are not the modules used for the current Run2 & Run3 cut-based EGM ID. I'll trace back to figure out whether we have any customers (other than the JME module mentioned in #46868). |
The line
cmssw/RecoEgamma/ElectronIdentification/plugins/CutBasedElectronID.cc
Line 145 in f912613
is faulty as the statement will always return
true
. What was probably intended wasThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: