Skip to content

PWGJE: Add task for K* in jets#6798

Closed
JimunLee wants to merge 19 commits intoAliceO2Group:masterfrom
JimunLee:master
Closed

PWGJE: Add task for K* in jets#6798
JimunLee wants to merge 19 commits intoAliceO2Group:masterfrom
JimunLee:master

Conversation

@JimunLee
Copy link
Contributor

Dear Experts,

Hello I am Jimun Lee,
I have recently started working on the K*(892) analysis.
This PR is for reconstructing K* within jets.

Requesting a PR review

Copy link
Collaborator

@nzardosh nzardosh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the PR, I will finish the rest of my review after we discuss

@@ -1,31 +1 @@
CMakeCache.txt
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this file should be removed

using namespace o2::framework::expressions;

struct kstarInJets {
SliceCache cache;
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

what is this doing?

SliceCache cache;
HistogramRegistry JEhistos{"JEhistos", {}, OutputObjHandlingPolicy::AnalysisObject};

HistogramRegistry registry{"registry",
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why do you have 2 different registries

{"h_part_jet_eta", "particle level jet #eta;#eta_{jet part};entries", {HistType::kTH1F, {{100, -1.0, 1.0}}}},
{"h_part_jet_phi", "particle level jet #phi;#phi_{jet part};entries", {HistType::kTH1F, {{80, -1.0, 7.}}}}}};

Configurable<std::string> cfgeventSelections{"cfgeventSelections", "sel8", "choose event selection"};
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

in the JE framework we tend not to start configurables with "cfg"

JEhistos.add("Resp_Matrix", "Resp_Matrix", HistType::kTHnSparseD, {PtAxis, axisPt, PtAxis, axisPt}); // REC(Phi,Jet), GEN(Phi,Jet)
JEhistos.add("Resp_Matrix_MATCHED", "Resp_Matrix_MATCHED", HistType::kTHnSparseD, {PtAxis, axisPt, PtAxis, axisPt}); // REC(Phi,Jet), GEN(Phi,Jet)

JEhistos.add("ptGeneratedPion", "ptGeneratedPion", kTH1F, {PtAxis});
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it seems you are trying to do all the analysis in histograms instead of trees. is this feasible for systematics

bool tpcPIDPassed{false}, tofPIDPassed{false};
if (std::abs(candidate.tpcNSigmaPi()) < cfgnTPCPID)
tpcPIDPassed = true;

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

same here

if (!trackPIDKaon(trk1) || !trackPIDPion(trk2))
return;

if (trk1.index() == trk2.index())
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

you should put this first

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

and it should be globalIndex()

if (!jetderiveddatautilities::selectCollision(collision, jetderiveddatautilities::JCollisionSel::sel8))
return;

for (auto& [track1, track2] : combinations(o2::soa::CombinationsFullIndexPolicy(tracks, tracks))) {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

can you point me to what this does and where its defined?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why do you do this for all pairs of tracks and not only the ones inside jets?
Maybe you intend these to be the jet tracks only but they are not. You have to do jer.tracks_as<soa::Join<aod::JTracks, aod::JTrackPIs>>()

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

so this then should be done inside the charged jet look for each jet

bool INELgt0 = false;
for (const auto& track : tracks) {
if (fabs(track.eta()) < cfgtrkMaxEta) {
INELgt0 = true;
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why is this only done for reco and not for data

continue;
}

if (originalTrack.index() >= originalTrack2.index())
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

all of these should be globalIndex() ?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think you should reformaulate the way you do the for loops. So that the second for loop over tracks starts from the track index after the current one in the first loop

@vkucera vkucera marked this pull request as draft July 11, 2024 08:05
@vkucera vkucera changed the title Pull Request for PWGJE/Tasks/kstarInJets.cxx PWGJE: Add tasks for K* in jets Jul 11, 2024
@vkucera vkucera changed the title PWGJE: Add tasks for K* in jets PWGJE: Add task for K* in jets Jul 11, 2024
@vkucera
Copy link
Collaborator

vkucera commented Jul 11, 2024

Hi @JimunLee , I have converted your PR to a draft, because it cannot be merged as it is now for several reasons, so there is no point running the compilation tests yet. You have wrongly removed .gitignore and committed PWGJE/.DS_Store and compile_commands.json. Please fix it and be careful to only commit files that concern your work.

Your task is derived from Adrian's task phiInJets.cxx. It would be more efficient to merge both analyses into a single file to avoid large duplication of code that both analyses have in common.

@vkucera
Copy link
Collaborator

vkucera commented Jul 14, 2024

@JimunLee There is no need for you to run clang-format. The formatting changes can be applied with the automatic PR. Please follow the instructions.

@JimunLee
Copy link
Contributor Author

@JimunLee There is no need for you to run clang-format. The formatting changes can be applied with the automatic PR. Please follow the instructions.

Ah, Thank you ! Then, Can I just click on the link and proceed with the process by pressing "Merge"?
Screenshot 2024-07-14 at 4 24 02 PM

@vkucera
Copy link
Collaborator

vkucera commented Jul 14, 2024

@JimunLee There is no need for you to run clang-format. The formatting changes can be applied with the automatic PR. Please follow the instructions.

Ah, Thank you ! Then, Can I just click on the link and proceed with the process by pressing "Merge"? Screenshot 2024-07-14 at 4 24 02 PM

Yes

Please consider the following formatting changes to #6798

yes, I did follow this process
@JimunLee JimunLee closed this Jul 18, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants