B2OC: rate reduction for some B2OC hlt2/spruce lines

• list of problematic lines: https://indico.cern.ch/event/1527716/contributions/6427495/subcontributions/539452/attachments/3033636/5356689/top_twenty_per_wg.html

related MR:

• !4583 (merged) (Thomas L., Xib lines)
• !4605 (merged) (Alessandro B., Lb2DsP spruce line)
• !4646 (merged) (Maurizio M., optimisation of B2Dsthhh spruce lines)
• !4671 (merged) (Aidan R. W., optimization of B2DD spruce lines)

target branch: !4508

assigned to @abertoli

changed the description

• we do not have a proponent for line 100
• the lines with a large exclusive rate are in red, large exclusive rate => candidates taken only by that line hence these are the most dangerous

@sblusk @phdargen cc @rputhuma @cchen2 @bshi @shunan we are pinging you for the spruce lines with id 25 and 61 in the table above

as you see line 25 is taking about 1 % of the overall LHCb disk usage and this is too high, also the average event size is 235.1 kB so very big, line 61 is also not manegeable

RTA/DPA are asking us to put in place some rate reduction for them, b2oc MiCo should be given a MR targeting b2oc-2025-dev with these reductions in place by March 31

@rputhuma @cchen2 @bshi @shunan I am the author of line with id 10 but forget about it, I will act accordingly

@yangk cc @rputhuma @cchen2 @bshi @shunan we are pinging you for the spruce line with id 24 in the table above

as you see the line is taking 1 % of the overall LHCb disk usage and the exclusive rate is large, see my comment on the first post above

RTA/DPA are asking us to put in place some rate reduction for them, b2oc MiCo should be given a MR targeting b2oc-2025-dev with these reductions in place by March 31

@cofitzpa cc @rputhuma @cchen2 @bshi @shunan we are pinging you for the D(s)D(s) spruce lines in the table above, in addition to your name Connor for them we have Antje Mödden and Philipp Ibis but I can not find their {@}name here

I am referring to lines with id 18 19 40 and so on, these are taking 1 % of the overall LHCb disk usage and we can not manage that in 2025

RTA/DPA are asking us to put in place some rate reduction for them, b2oc MiCo should be given a MR targeting b2oc-2025-dev with these reductions in place by March 31

Have added an MVA cut here since these lines didn't have any !4671 (merged)

@mamartin cc @rputhuma @cchen2 @bshi @shunan we are pinging you for the D*hhh spruce lines in the table above, with id 10, 12, 26 and so on

these are taking 1 % of the overall LHCb disk usage and we can not manage that in 2025

RTA/DPA are asking us to put in place some rate reduction for them, b2oc MiCo should be given a MR targeting b2oc-2025-dev with these reductions in place by March 31

Dear @abertoli see !4646 (merged)

thanks @mamartin cc @shunan @bshi !

have you run something like:

./Moore/run gaudirun.py Moore/Hlt/Hlt2Conf/options/examples/b_to_open_charm/spruce_b2oc_example.py | tee spruce-b2oc.log

and if so can you attach here the .log file ?

Sure. spruce-b2oc-20250328.log

@tlatham @mwhitehe cc @rputhuma @cchen2 @bshi @shunan I know that you are already working on the rate reduction for the Xibm lines listed in the table above, this is your MR !4583 (merged)

so let me just add that RTA/DPA is asking us to be ready by March 31

@yangk cc @rputhuma @cchen2 @bshi @shunan are you also the author of BuToDspPi0Resolved_DspToHHH ? I am asking because in https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/viewauth/LHCbPhysics/B2OCRun3SelectionLines I can not find it and that line is also problematic

changed due date to March 31, 2025

mentioned in merge request !4583 (merged)

changed the description

running:

./Moore/run gaudirun.py Moore/Hlt/Hlt2Conf/options/examples/b_to_open_charm/spruce_b2oc_example.py >& spruce-b2oc.log &

on the master branch, using all the available stat in the input file, I got the .root file for the monitoring histos appended

spruce_b2oc_monitoring.root

changed title from rate reduction for some B2OC hlt2/spruce lines to B2OC: rate reduction for some B2OC hlt2/spruce lines

added B2OC label

changed the description

mentioned in merge request !4646 (merged)

changed the description

mentioned in merge request !4647 (closed)