METReconstruction: calculate dR directly
The MET reconstruction need to retrieve the clusters around 0.2 cone of the tau candidate. Since the vertex of the tau candidate could be different from PV0, a vertex correction is needed. The corrected clusters are decorated onto the tau candidate, but is transient only. This break the MET reconstruction from ESD/AOD. After recent development of tau reconstruction, the correction is now much simple, and we could do it directly in METReconstruction.
This should fix ATLASRECTS-5793.
Merge request reports
Activity
added JetEtmiss Reconstruction master labels
This merge request affects 1 package:
- Reconstruction/MET/METReconstruction
This merge request affects 2 files:
- Reconstruction/MET/METReconstruction/CMakeLists.txt
- Reconstruction/MET/METReconstruction/Root/METTauAssociator.cxx
Adding @goetz as watcher
added Tau review-pending-level-1 labels
CI Result SUCCESS (hash 463c0fe2)Athena AthSimulation AthGeneration AnalysisBase externals cmake make required tests optional tests Full details available on this CI monitor view
Athena: number of compilation errors 0, warnings 0
AthSimulation: number of compilation errors 0, warnings 0
AthGeneration: number of compilation errors 0, warnings 0
AnalysisBase: number of compilation errors 0, warnings 0
For experts only: Jenkins output [CI-MERGE-REQUEST-CC7 24686]added urgent label
added review-approved label and removed review-pending-level-1 label
- Resolved by Teng Jian Khoo
Hi, just trying to understand the purpose of the correction here. In MET reco, all we want is the list of the jet constituent clusters, so that we can calculate the 4-vector sum that should be subtracted from the jet if we decide that the tau takes priority (i.e. is selected for the tau term).
Is the four-vector correction applied so that you calculate deltaR to the tau seed axis correctly? If so, do you need to calculate the deltaR because the clusterList returned from the tau is more inclusive than the clusters actually used for the tau energy reconstruction?
Thanks @khoo !
mentioned in commit e5557a15
added sweep:ignore label