Phase 2 tracker: realistic description of 3D modules in inner tracker #41880

adewit · 2023-06-06T08:59:39Z

PR description:

This adds a new tracker (T33, workflow D100) with a more realistic description of the 3D modules, which consist of two separate sensors with a gap between them. This is now modelled correctly. The new geometry also updates the sizes of the dead areas in other parts of the inner tracker, to match the latest designs. More details e.g. available here: https://indico.cern.ch/event/1242574/contributions/5382602/attachments/2637975/4564459/em20230428.pdf

@emiglior FYI

PR validation:

Code checks+format done; verified that standard workflows still run.

Track validation inspected (http://personalpages.to.infn.it/~migliore/T25std_T25split/FourMu_NoSmear/plots-new/index.html) and looks as expected.

If this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR. If this PR will be backported please specify to which release cycle the backport is meant for:

Not a backport

cmsbuild · 2023-06-06T09:07:17Z

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-41880/35800

This PR adds an extra 368KB to repository
There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:
- File Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/relval_2026.py modified in PR(s): Guard for No Digis for Phase2 and Patatrack NuGun #41255
- File Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/upgradeWorkflowComponents.py modified in PR(s): Adding all geometries and the FullRecoGPU for Patatrack wfs for Phase2 #41011, Guard for No Digis for Phase2 and Patatrack NuGun #41255, More Configurable Pixel Tracks and HIon Template #41632, Add run3 tracking low pu era #33532

cmsbuild · 2023-06-06T09:07:49Z

A new Pull Request was created by @adewit for master.

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/AlCa (alca)
Configuration/Geometry (geometry, upgrade)
Configuration/PyReleaseValidation (pdmv, upgrade)
Configuration/StandardSequences (operations)
DataFormats/TrackerCommon (reconstruction)
Geometry/CMSCommonData (geometry, upgrade)
Geometry/CommonDetUnit (geometry)
Geometry/CommonTopologies (geometry)
Geometry/TrackerCommonData (geometry)
Geometry/TrackerGeometryBuilder (geometry)
Geometry/TrackerNumberingBuilder (geometry)
Geometry/TrackerRecoData (geometry)
Geometry/TrackerSimData (geometry)
RecoTracker/MeasurementDet (reconstruction)
RecoTracker/PixelLowPtUtilities (reconstruction)
RecoTracker/TkDetLayers (reconstruction)

@perrotta, @rappoccio, @Dr15Jones, @bsunanda, @makortel, @bbilin, @civanch, @mdhildreth, @tvami, @cmsbuild, @AdrianoDee, @srimanob, @saumyaphor4252, @clacaputo, @kskovpen, @sunilUIET, @francescobrivio, @mandrenguyen, @fabiocos, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@VourMa, @felicepantaleo, @kpedro88, @ghugo83, @Martin-Grunewald, @bsunanda, @mmusich, @slomeo, @venturia, @vargasa, @makortel, @JanFSchulte, @dgulhan, @missirol, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @rovere, @VinInn, @tocheng, @ebrondol, @mtosi, @fabiocos, @gpetruc, @sameasy this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @rappoccio you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

mmusich · 2023-06-06T09:09:49Z

Configuration/Geometry/python/GeometryDD4hepExtended2026D100Reco_cff.py

+from Geometry.TrackerGeometryBuilder.trackerParameters_cff import *
+from Geometry.TrackerNumberingBuilder.trackerTopology_cfi import *
+from Geometry.TrackerGeometryBuilder.idealForDigiTrackerGeometry_cff import *
+trackerGeometry.applyAlignment = False


why? #41075

mmusich · 2023-06-06T09:10:36Z

Configuration/Geometry/python/GeometryExtended2026D100Reco_cff.py

+from Geometry.TrackerGeometryBuilder.trackerParameters_cff import *
+from Geometry.TrackerNumberingBuilder.trackerTopology_cfi import *
+from Geometry.TrackerGeometryBuilder.idealForDigiTrackerGeometry_cff import *
+trackerGeometry.applyAlignment = False


why? #41075

mmusich · 2023-06-06T09:10:49Z

Configuration/Geometry/python/dict2026Geometry.py

+            'from Geometry.TrackerGeometryBuilder.trackerParameters_cff import *',
+            'from Geometry.TrackerNumberingBuilder.trackerTopology_cfi import *',
+            'from Geometry.TrackerGeometryBuilder.idealForDigiTrackerGeometry_cff import *',
+            'trackerGeometry.applyAlignment = False',


why? #41075

Apologies for the omission and thanks for spotting it - T33 was cloned from T25 before 41075, and I missed the change afterwards. Now corrected.

cmsbuild · 2023-06-06T11:38:41Z

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-41880/35801

This PR adds an extra 392KB to repository
There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:
- File Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/relval_2026.py modified in PR(s): Guard for No Digis for Phase2 and Patatrack NuGun #41255
- File Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/upgradeWorkflowComponents.py modified in PR(s): Adding all geometries and the FullRecoGPU for Patatrack wfs for Phase2 #41011, Guard for No Digis for Phase2 and Patatrack NuGun #41255, More Configurable Pixel Tracks and HIon Template #41632, Add run3 tracking low pu era #33532

cmsbuild · 2023-06-06T11:39:10Z

Pull request #41880 was updated. @perrotta, @rappoccio, @Dr15Jones, @bsunanda, @makortel, @bbilin, @civanch, @mdhildreth, @tvami, @cmsbuild, @AdrianoDee, @srimanob, @saumyaphor4252, @clacaputo, @kskovpen, @sunilUIET, @francescobrivio, @mandrenguyen, @fabiocos, @davidlange6 can you please check and sign again.

srimanob · 2023-06-06T11:57:07Z

test parameters:

workflows = 25634.0
relvals_opt = --what cleanedupgrade,standard,highstats,pileup,generator,extendedgen,production,identity,ged,machine,premix,nano,gpu,2017,2026

srimanob · 2023-06-06T11:59:10Z

Hi @adewit
Could you please comment on the plan for new geometry? We are about to move the baseline to T98 in CMSSW_13_2_0_pre2. Do you want to start the call for validation after that?

srimanob · 2023-06-06T11:59:27Z

@cmsbuild please test

emiglior · 2023-06-06T14:39:00Z

Could you please comment on the plan for new geometry? We are about to move the baseline to T98 in CMSSW_13_2_0_pre2. Do you want to start the call for validation after that?

As we do not observe large differences in physics performance between T33/D100 and T32/D98 (and considering that T33 is not yet the final TBPX layout), it is not strictly necessary adopting T33 as new baseline.

A possible exception is if 13_2_X will be used for the production of large MC samples of interest for the Tracker alignment. The reason is that T33 is introducing a new level in the hierarchy and a new detid scheme for TBPX layer1, and perhaps there is in some interest in the TkAl group to start to play with this geometry.
But @sroychow @consuegs @henriettepetersen are in a better position to comment on this.

sunilUIET · 2023-06-15T12:52:56Z

+pdmv

perrotta · 2023-06-15T13:12:46Z

@sunilUIET Can you please sign this urgently?

@bsunanda @adewit please notice that it is now too late for entering a 17k line code into pre2, which we plan to build within minutes. This PR will be taken into account for the next pre-release

bsunanda · 2023-06-15T13:39:27Z

That is fine. I want an IB with this PR included. I need to modify the dictionary for both Run3 and Phase2 scenarios for some corrections. One of them is rather urgent (RPC geometry)

perrotta · 2023-06-16T15:37:08Z

+1

cmsbuild · 2023-06-16T15:37:37Z

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request will be automatically merged.

smuzaffar · 2023-06-19T08:47:46Z

DataFormats/TrackerCommon/interface/TrackerTopology.h

    unsigned int layerMask_;
    unsigned int ladderMask_;
    unsigned int moduleMask_;
+    unsigned int doubleMask_;


@adewit , we have couple of warning in IBs due to this change. Can you please provide a fix with correct default values for these newly added member here https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/master/DataFormats/TrackReco/test/testHitPattern.cpp#L16

Hi @smuzaffar - since this member is not used for phase 0 or 1 I will just 0-initialize it in testHitPattern.cpp. Given the unit tests apparently didn't reveal this problem, what test(s) should I run locally to make sure everything is now OK?

I guess, just recompiling DataFormats/TrackReco will tell.

- In the case of the phase-2 IT there is an additional layer of hierarcy, due ot split sensors in Layer 1. First introduced in PR cms-sw#41880

mmusich · 2023-10-19T08:27:28Z

For the record this commit 5af9d66 should have been propagated to StandaloneTrackerTopology as well [*] (to keep in mind if there are further changes foreseen in the hierarchy).

@emiglior @sroychow FYI

[*] fixed now at #43059

- In the case of the phase-2 IT there is an additional layer of hierarcy, due ot split sensors in Layer 1. First introduced in PR cms-sw#41880

mmusich · 2023-12-02T16:09:44Z

Configuration/AlCa/python/autoCondPhase2.py

@@ -27,6 +28,7 @@
    'T21' : ( ','.join( [ 'SiPixelLorentzAngle_phase2_T15_v5_mc' ,SiPixelLARecord,connectionString, "", "2020-05-05 20:00:00.000"] ), ),  #uH = 0.053/T (TBPX), uH=0.0/T (TEPX+TFPX)
    'T25' : ( ','.join( [ 'SiPixelLorentzAngle_phase2_T25_v0_mc' ,SiPixelLARecord,connectionString, "", "2021-03-16 20:00:00.000"] ), ),  #uH = 0.053/T (TBPX L2,L3,L4), uH=0.0/T (TBPX L1 TEPX+TFPX)
    'T30' : ( ','.join( [ 'SiPixelLorentzAngle_phase2_IT_v6.4.0_25x100_v1_mc' ,SiPixelLARecord,connectionString, "", "2021-11-22 21:00:00.000"] ), ),  #uH = 0.053/T (TBPX), uH=0.0/T (TEPX+TFPX)
+    'T33' : ( ','.join( [ 'SiPixelLorentzAngle_phase2_IT_v7.1.1_25x100_v1_mc' ,SiPixelLARecord,connectionString, "", "2023-05-16 20:00:00.000"] ), ),  #uH = 0.053/T (TBPX L2,L3,L4), uH=0.0/T (TBPX L1 TEPX+TFPX)
 }

 allTags["LAWidth"] = {


for the record, this section of the map should have been updated as well, see #43466 (comment) and following.

- In the case of the phase-2 IT there is an additional layer of hierarcy, due ot split sensors in Layer 1. First introduced in PR cms-sw#41880

cmsbuild added this to the CMSSW_13_2_X milestone Jun 6, 2023

cmsbuild added reconstruction-pending alca-pending geometry-pending operations-pending pending-signatures tests-pending orp-pending pdmv-pending upgrade-pending code-checks-pending tracking trk labels Jun 6, 2023

cmsbuild added code-checks-approved and removed code-checks-pending labels Jun 6, 2023

mmusich reviewed Jun 6, 2023

View reviewed changes

cmsbuild added code-checks-pending and removed code-checks-approved labels Jun 6, 2023

cmsbuild added code-checks-approved and removed code-checks-pending labels Jun 6, 2023

cmsbuild added tests-started and removed tests-pending labels Jun 6, 2023

cmsbuild added pdmv-approved and removed pdmv-pending labels Jun 15, 2023

cmsbuild mentioned this pull request Jun 16, 2023

Nm dqm egamma v update for13 1 x #41987

Closed

cmsbuild added operations-approved fully-signed orp-approved and removed operations-pending pending-signatures orp-pending labels Jun 16, 2023

cmsbuild merged commit a85e8b9 into cms-sw:master Jun 16, 2023

smuzaffar reviewed Jun 19, 2023

View reviewed changes

adewit mentioned this pull request Jun 19, 2023

Initialize values for all members of PixelBarrelValues #42008

Merged

mmusich added a commit to mmusich/cmssw that referenced this pull request Oct 18, 2023

Fix StandaloneTrackerTopology for split phase-2 sensors

6c36e37

- In the case of the phase-2 IT there is an additional layer of hierarcy, due ot split sensors in Layer 1. First introduced in PR cms-sw#41880

mmusich added a commit to mmusich/cmssw that referenced this pull request Oct 18, 2023

Fix StandaloneTrackerTopology for split phase-2 sensors

8436078

- In the case of the phase-2 IT there is an additional layer of hierarcy, due ot split sensors in Layer 1. First introduced in PR cms-sw#41880

mmusich added a commit to mmusich/cmssw that referenced this pull request Oct 19, 2023

Fix StandaloneTrackerTopology for split phase-2 sensors

e165f7f

- In the case of the phase-2 IT there is an additional layer of hierarcy, due ot split sensors in Layer 1. First introduced in PR cms-sw#41880

mmusich added a commit to mmusich/cmssw that referenced this pull request Oct 19, 2023

Fix StandaloneTrackerTopology for split phase-2 sensors

1d7cafb

- In the case of the phase-2 IT there is an additional layer of hierarcy, due ot split sensors in Layer 1. First introduced in PR cms-sw#41880

mmusich added a commit to mmusich/cmssw that referenced this pull request Oct 23, 2023

Fix StandaloneTrackerTopology for split phase-2 sensors

3e07a3c

- In the case of the phase-2 IT there is an additional layer of hierarcy, due ot split sensors in Layer 1. First introduced in PR cms-sw#41880

mmusich mentioned this pull request Dec 2, 2023

Phase2-HGX350X Add a new workflow for a version containing V18 definition of HGCal #43466

Merged

mmusich reviewed Dec 2, 2023

View reviewed changes

Raffaella07 mentioned this pull request Apr 17, 2024

Adding Phase2 tracker T36, T37 and T38 (for IT studies) #44765

Merged

mmusich mentioned this pull request Jun 8, 2024

D110 and Alpaka (and CUDA) Pixel Tracks Issues #45177

Closed

mmusich mentioned this pull request Aug 23, 2024

Problem in dumping Fireworks Geometry #43097

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Phase 2 tracker: realistic description of 3D modules in inner tracker #41880

Phase 2 tracker: realistic description of 3D modules in inner tracker #41880

adewit commented Jun 6, 2023

cmsbuild commented Jun 6, 2023

cmsbuild commented Jun 6, 2023

mmusich Jun 6, 2023

mmusich Jun 6, 2023

mmusich Jun 6, 2023

adewit Jun 6, 2023

cmsbuild commented Jun 6, 2023

cmsbuild commented Jun 6, 2023

srimanob commented Jun 6, 2023

srimanob commented Jun 6, 2023

srimanob commented Jun 6, 2023

emiglior commented Jun 6, 2023

sunilUIET commented Jun 15, 2023

perrotta commented Jun 15, 2023

bsunanda commented Jun 15, 2023

perrotta commented Jun 16, 2023

cmsbuild commented Jun 16, 2023

smuzaffar Jun 19, 2023

adewit Jun 19, 2023

mmusich Jun 19, 2023

mmusich commented Oct 19, 2023

mmusich Dec 2, 2023

Phase 2 tracker: realistic description of 3D modules in inner tracker #41880

Phase 2 tracker: realistic description of 3D modules in inner tracker #41880

Conversation

adewit commented Jun 6, 2023

PR description:

PR validation:

If this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR. If this PR will be backported please specify to which release cycle the backport is meant for:

cmsbuild commented Jun 6, 2023

cmsbuild commented Jun 6, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cmsbuild commented Jun 6, 2023

cmsbuild commented Jun 6, 2023

srimanob commented Jun 6, 2023

srimanob commented Jun 6, 2023

srimanob commented Jun 6, 2023

emiglior commented Jun 6, 2023

sunilUIET commented Jun 15, 2023

perrotta commented Jun 15, 2023

bsunanda commented Jun 15, 2023

perrotta commented Jun 16, 2023

cmsbuild commented Jun 16, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mmusich commented Oct 19, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment