Draft: TrigEGam:Factorizing FastElectron Step into FastTracking and FastTrack to FastCalo matching step
As discussed in ATR-25499 and ATR-25865 to keep the Fast step of electron independent of FastTracks for idperf chains we factorised fast electron step as following
for idperf
FastCalo
|
V
FastTrack
|
V
Empty
|
V
PrecisionCalo
|
V
PrecisionTracking
|
V
GSFRefit
for Nominal electron
FastCalo
|
V
FastTrack
|
V
FastElectron
|
V
PrecisionCalo
|
V
PrecisionTracking
|
V
GSFRefit
|
V
PrecisionElectron
The caveat we are facing for having empty sequence in between we are losing the downstream reconstructions
INFO Chains passing step (1st row events & 2nd row decision counts):
INFO ChainName L1 AfterPS Step1 Step2 Step3 Step4 Step5 Output
INFO All 10 10 - - - - - 10
INFO HLT_e5_idperf_tight_L1EM3 #1761643260
INFO -- #1761643260 Events 10 10 10 10 - - - 10
INFO -- #1761643260 Features 44 44 - - -
In clarification I would like to mention our nominal and nogsf step don't use any Empty step after precisionTracking step of nogsf chain the nominal/gsf chain uses different streamline as follows
FastCalo
|
V
FastTrack
|
V
FastElectron
|
V
PrecisionCalo
|
V
PrecisionTracking
|--------------------|
V V
GSFRefit PrecisionElectron
|
V
PrecisionElectron_gsf
adding @tamartin , @khoo , @sshaw , @cjmeyer , @safarzad , @mark , @tbold for suggestion/help
Thanks, Debo.