Adding original track decoration for GSF Tracks to PHYSLITE
The decoration connecting the GSF track particle to the original track particle (in a different collection) was missing from PHYSLITE. This caused some issues in overlap removal in rare cases, and potentially other places (unclear about MET). I've checked that the links are there, seem to point to the correct container, and seem to have an index (I hope that's sufficient to indicate that this is working!).
Thanks very much to @mhank for the report!
Discussion: https://indico.cern.ch/event/1264717/contributions/5318949/attachments/2612345/4513767/amg_mh.pdf
Merge request reports
Activity
added Derivation changes-derivation-output labels
added master review-pending-level-1 labels
- Resolved by Magdalena Slawinska
Hi @zmarshal ,
well spotted... but I'm wondering if this will be 100% watertight. I'm assuming this
originalTrackParticle
is pointing to theInDetTrackParticles
(thinned) rather than theGSFTrackParticles
(not thinned), and since we don't explicitly keep the InDetTrackParticles associated with electrons (because we instead have the GSF container) I think it will only be by luck (track > 10GeV or shared with a muon or tau etc) that the track will be there.If we want this link to be valid we'd have to do thinning to keep also the InDetTrackParticles associated with electrons, but I guess we don't want to do that due to size...
Cheers,
James
CI Result FAILURE (hash 77d71b61)Athena externals cmake make tests Full details available on this CI monitor view. Check the JIRA CI status board for known problems
Athena: number of compilation errors 0, warnings 0
For experts only: Jenkins output [CI-MERGE-REQUEST-CC7 68074] CI Result SUCCESS (hash 77d71b61)Athena externals cmake make tests Full details available on this CI monitor view. Check the JIRA CI status board for known problems
Athena: number of compilation errors 0, warnings 1
For experts only: Jenkins output [CI-MERGE-REQUEST-CC7 68102]added review-approved label and removed review-pending-level-1 label
added review-pending-level-1 label and removed review-approved label
- Resolved by Cristiano Alpigiani
Hello,
following the creation of the 23.0 branch from master, you should now decide whether this MR should target 23.0 or master, according to these guidelines agreed in the Software Weekly meeting:
https://indico.cern.ch/event/1266042/attachments/2613269/4515725/branching_guidelines.pdf
If you decide that this MR should target 23.0, please re-direct it by editing and changing the target branch in the drop-down menu. If it should stay in master, please indicate this as a reply to this message. Remember that all MRs going into 23.0 will also be swept into master.
Thanks!
James & Nick
added 23.0 label