Tim Christiansen (CERN), Claudio Campagnari (UCSB), and Benedikt Hegner (CERN) for the Top-Physics Group AOD/PAT-tuples: Top-PAG Plans and Needs for the.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Alain Romeyer - January Light higgs decay in SUSY cascade - Status report Introduction Trigger efficiency B tagging Jet calibration Invariant mass.
Advertisements

LHCb Upgrade Overview ALICE, ATLAS, CMS & LHCb joint workshop on DAQ Château de Bossey 13 March 2013 Beat Jost / Cern.
Single Top Trigger Studies Top Trigger Meeting, 21 May Patrick Ryan, MSU Single Top Trigger Studies Top Trigger Meeting 21 May 2007 Patrick Ryan.
HiT – Higgs and Top (Thursday, June 22, 2000) 1.News - Boaz/Meenakshi 2.Trigger Simulator Status – who?? 3.Proposal for a HiT workshop – Meenakshi/Boaz.
J. Leonard, U. Wisconsin 1 Commissioning the Trigger of the CMS Experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider Jessica L. Leonard Real-Time Conference Lisbon,
Top Turns Ten March 2 nd, Measurement of the Top Quark Mass The Low Bias Template Method using Lepton + jets events Kevin Black, Meenakshi Narain.
Kevin Black Meenakshi Narain Boston University
UCSB CDF Group, DOE Site visit, Jan 18, J. Incandela 1 Top Physics at CDF ++ Top Quark and New Physics with an eye toward the LHC Work completed.
Top Trigger Strategy in ATLASWorkshop on Top Physics, 18 Oct Patrick Ryan, MSU Top Trigger Strategy in ATLAS Workshop on Top Physics Grenoble.
Summary Ted Liu, FNAL Feb. 9 th, 2005 L2 Pulsar 2rd IRR Review, ICB-2E, video: 82Pulsar
Update FTK Meeting 07/13/06 Erik Brubaker U of Chicago.
Single Top Trigger Studies Top Trigger Meeting, 9 May Patrick Ryan, MSU Single Top Trigger Studies Top Trigger Meeting 9 May 2007 Patrick Ryan.
1 Calice Analysis Meeting 13/02/07David Ward Just a collection of thoughts to guide us in planning electron analysis In order to end up with a coherent.
DØ Higgs II Gordon Watts for the collaboration. 2 Gordon Watts (UW Seattle) WIN’ /07/2003 Outline Channels H  WW * H  H ++ H --  +  +  -
Large scale data flow in local and GRID environment V.Kolosov, I.Korolko, S.Makarychev ITEP Moscow.
PAT-driven Efficiency Measurements and Calculations A. Singh, Amandeep Singh, S. Beri, Pb. University(Chd.)‏ J. Berryhill, K. Misra FermiLab (U.S)
Tracking at the ATLAS LVL2 Trigger Athens – HEP2003 Nikos Konstantinidis University College London.
CATphysics meeting, 14/11/2008D. Froidevaux Introduction and news + New fellows since end of September: W. Fedorko (ADT), M. Jimenez (ADE), D. Kollar (ADP),
Tests with JT0623 & JT0947 at Indiana University Nagoya PMT database test results for JT0623 at 3220V: This tube has somewhat higher than usual gain. 5×10.
GROUP 1 Advantages of electronic system over its corresponding traditional system.
SRM 2.2: status of the implementations and GSSD 6 th March 2007 Flavia Donno, Maarten Litmaath INFN and IT/GD, CERN.
Instructions for DP Approval Slides I Plots: – Fonts Large for readability Standard fonts : – Arial, Times New Roman, or similar – Do not use Comic Sans.
27 July 2006Trigger Upgrades Review1 Status & Plans of the TDWG Mission Statement What Do We have to Guide Us ? Caveats & Concerns Current & Anticipated.
Calorimeter Data Monitoring News Benoit Viaud (LAL-in2p3) B. Viaud, Calo Mtg Aug. 31 st
W+jets and Z+jets studies at CMS Christopher S. Rogan, California Institute of Technology - HCP Evian-les-Bains Analysis Strategy Analysis Overview:
Trigger & Analysis Avi Yagil UCSD. 14-June-2007HCPSS - Triggers & AnalysisAvi Yagil 2 Table of Contents Introduction –Rates & cross sections –Beam Crossings.
Muon LPC Meeting, 14 Sep Overview of Muon PRS Activities Darin Acosta University of Florida.
R jets measurement. Outline Motivation for a R jets measurement –What is this measurement? –Why is it interesting? –Other R jets measurement within ATLAS.
DPDs and Trigger Plans for Derived Physics Data Follow up and trigger specific issues Ricardo Gonçalo and Fabrizio Salvatore RHUL.
Status of Muon Trigger Efficiency Measurement for ICHEP Benedikt Hegner, Benjamin Klein, Yvonne Küssel, Patricia Lobelle, Markus Marienfeld, Rahmat Rahmat,
1 High PT Status of data workflow and first analyses plans for October exercise K. Kousouris (Fermilab) K. Rabbertz (University of Karlsruhe)
IOP HEPP: Beauty Physics in the UK, 12/11/08Julie Kirk1 B-triggers at ATLAS Julie Kirk Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Introduction – B physics at LHC –
Organisation of the Beatenberg Trigger Workshop Ricardo Gonçalo Higgs WG Meeting - 22 Jan.09.
PWG3 Analysis: status, experience, requests Andrea Dainese on behalf of PWG3 ALICE Offline Week, CERN, Andrea Dainese 1.
Analysis trains – Status & experience from operation Mihaela Gheata.
Low p T Muon trigger studies for J/       Supreet Pal Singh (Panjab University, Chandigarh) Prof. J.B.Singh (Panjab University, Chandigarh) Prof.
HCAL DPG Status1 Olga Kodolova / Frank Chlebana HCAL DPG Status Olga Kodolova for the HCAL DPG October 20, 2011.
Integration of the ATLAS Tag Database with Data Management and Analysis Components Caitriana Nicholson University of Glasgow 3 rd September 2007 CHEP,
Why A Software Review? Now have experience of real data and first major analysis results –What have we learned? –How should that change what we do next.
CMS Week Sept '07Leonard Apanasevich (UIC) Pedrame Bargassa (Rice) 1 Physics Priorities for Trigger Development Leonard Apanasevich (UIC) Pedrame Bargessa.
The ATLAS TAGs Database - Experiences and further developments Elisabeth Vinek, CERN & University of Vienna on behalf of the TAGs developers group.
H->bb Weekly Meeting Ricardo Gonçalo (RHUL) HSG5 H->bb Weekly Meeting, 22 February 2011.
Monika Grothe, DQM for MC from EWK PAG, Sep DQM for MC from EWK PAG Monika Grothe U Wisconsin September Currently 3 modules: 1.EwkDQM in.
M. Gheata ALICE offline week, October Current train wagons GroupAOD producersWork on ESD input Work on AOD input PWG PWG31 (vertexing)2 (+
Alignment in real-time in current detector and upgrade 6th LHCb Computing Workshop 18 November 2015 Beat Jost / Cern.
PWG3 Analysis: status, experience, requests Andrea Dainese on behalf of PWG3 ALICE Offline Week, CERN, Andrea Dainese 1.
Victoria, Sept WLCG Collaboration Workshop1 ATLAS Dress Rehersals Kors Bos NIKHEF, Amsterdam.
04/09/2007 Reconstruction of LHC events at CMS Tommaso Boccali - INFN Pisa Shahram Rahatlou - Roma University Lucia Silvestris - INFN Bari On behalf of.
Alain Romeyer - Sept Light Higgs search in SUSY cascades Introduction (Previous studies) Plans for this analysis Simulation chain Reconstruction.
Feb. 3, 2007IFC meeting1 Beam test report Ph. Bruel on behalf of the beam test working group Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope.
1 Status of Tracker Alignment b-tagging Workshop Nhan Tran (JHU) On behalf of the Tracker Alignment Group.
News and Related Issues Ted & Kirsten May 27, 2005 TDWG News since last meeting (April 29th) Organization Issues: how to improve communication Future Plans:
6 December 2004Exotic Trigger Meeting1 SUSY_DILEPTON TRIGGERS: studies and proposed updates M.Giordani,B.Heinemann,G.Pauletta, M.Rossi,P.Wittich.
L1Calo EM Efficiency Maps Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham L1Calo Weekly Meeting 07/03/2011.
Oct 16, 2009T.Kurca Grilles France1 CMS Data Distribution Tibor Kurča Institut de Physique Nucléaire de Lyon Journées “Grilles France” October 16, 2009.
Introduction 08/11/2007 Higgs WG – Trigger meeting Ricardo Gonçalo, RHUL.
ATLAS UK physics meeting, 10/01/08 1 Triggers for B physics Julie Kirk RAL Overview of B trigger strategy Algorithms – current status and plans Menus Efficiencies.
ATLAS Distributed Computing Tutorial Tags: What, Why, When, Where and How? Mike Kenyon University of Glasgow.
DB and Information Flow Issues ● Selecting types of run ● L1Calo databases ● Archiving run parameters ● Tools Murrough Landon 28 April 2009.
5/9/081 CP WG γ from trees meeting Guy Wilkinson, 2/4/09.
SUSY DILEPTON TRIGGER MONITORING
Data Driven study for Same Sign Dileptons July 31 st 2009, “CMS SUSY Leptonic Meeting” 1 Sanjay Padhi.
Monitoring of L1Calo EM Efficiencies
Transversal calibration of Geiger Cells
Modifications to the DRS4’s code
G. Watts (UW/Seattle) For the Hidden Valley Group
Discussions on group meeting
tth, (h→bb) with EventViews
Update : about 8~16% are writes
Revision Update and Reports
Presentation transcript:

Tim Christiansen (CERN), Claudio Campagnari (UCSB), and Benedikt Hegner (CERN) for the Top-Physics Group AOD/PAT-tuples: Top-PAG Plans and Needs for the Startup Phase CMS AOD/PAT-tuple Workshop CERN, 4 September 2009

Page 2T. Christiansen, C. Campagnari, B. Hegner · AOD/PAT Workshop. · CERN, 04-Sep-2009 Some general words …  Top group (as prob. other PA/OGs) want a ~100kB data format (tier) useful for  90% of the analysis phase space  We also strongly prefer this to be the common denominator for ~all analyses, not just for top  AOD (= RECO with dropped info) has been designed precisely with this in mind, but of course there are other options  A PAT-tuple to fulfill all the above is likely to be as large as the AOD and contains frequently (at the beginning) changing info (calibrations, particle-ID, …)  Most of the analyses ran -- so far -- from RECO, but all top analyses that we are aware of can run from AOD For the cases in the past where missing info was identified, we made sure to include this in the next version of AOD

Page 3T. Christiansen, C. Campagnari, B. Hegner · AOD/PAT Workshop. · CERN, 04-Sep-2009 Our Proposal  Our preferred choice would be: Take AOD as the  90 % common data format for PAG analyses  This means, we, CMS, have to maintain it centrally. If things are missing in version AOD-x, they need to be included in AOD-x+1. If necessary, groups can “privately” produce their AOD-x+1 samples and use them until production is ready to do this for all in the next iteration … CMS analysis should be done with PAT  This can be PAT-on-the-fly or via intermediate PAT-tuples  Request a useful maintained (and somewhat certified!) PAT configuration that analysts can use for their analysis.  Common modifications of the analysts to this default PAT configuration will likely tailor it to the needs, i.e. dropping or switching off things that are not needed by the analysis (to safe time and or space).  It is possible also to imagine sub-branches of this default PAT configuration per PAG (maintained by the group)  Certification under the roof of PVT? Or PAT? Clearly this needs help from all PAGs & POGs.

Page 4T. Christiansen, C. Campagnari, B. Hegner · AOD/PAT Workshop. · CERN, 04-Sep-2009 Out Proposal, continued … This proposal does not exclude the production of PAT- tuples, in fact this is encouraged, but rather at sub- group level to start with (e.g. common to similar signatures/channels): PAT-tuples can then be organized in small’ish groups, for which it will also be easier and faster to agree, converge and react.  This would then indeed give the chance of a real interactively- usable “tuple” of O(10kB)/evt.

Page 5T. Christiansen, C. Campagnari, B. Hegner · AOD/PAT Workshop. · CERN, 04-Sep-2009 Top Strategy for first data  Disclaimer: Note that this is preliminary and still under discussion in the group, and it is not quite related to AOD/PAT-tuple discussion.  We would like to postpone the need for skimming (on reco info) to as late as possible by an optimal use of Secondary Dataset (SD) definitions SDs are -- as only trigger info is filtered on -- immutable against re-reconstructions SDs can be commonly used by >1 PAG, and thus a real candidate for central production and efficient use of resources No extra skimming means also no extra layer of production (be it pro or private) Currently, We are working on proposals for SD definitions for  a high-p T mu+X SD (almost done) and  a high-p T e+X SD (more complicated, coming soon)  Possibly add multi-jet SD later (mainly for monitoring)

Page 6T. Christiansen, C. Campagnari, B. Hegner · AOD/PAT Workshop. · CERN, 04-Sep-2009 Example: High-p T Muon SD  The main difference to other proposals we have seen so far is the efficient use of trigger info available in the data: In addition to filtering on trigger bits, we cut on HLT-object information, i.e. further reducing the rate in a flexible way without the need to introduce a whole new trigger bit  Caveat: only the p4-vector of trigger objects are available in RECO/AOD  OK for muon, but not that optimal for electron + X  A preliminary draft for a high-pT muon SD is currently being circulated: Tailored for high-p T  +X analyses high-p T means  20 GeV  this is the lowest threshold for top analyses and most of EWK & SUSY (except for possibly low-mass DY and some multi-lepton SUSY) May also includes di-muon triggers with somewhat lower thresholds on trigger-object p T

Page 7T. Christiansen, C. Campagnari, B. Hegner · AOD/PAT Workshop. · CERN, 04-Sep-2009 Backup

Page 8T. Christiansen, C. Campagnari, B. Hegner · AOD/PAT Workshop. · CERN, 04-Sep-2009 Example: High-p T Muon SD II  Conditions for (similarly for ): Evt must be in the muon PD Any of  OpenHLT_Mu3  OpenHLT_Mu5  OpenHLT_Mu9  OpenHLT_IsoMu3 OR any of  OpenHLT_DoubleMu0  OpenHLT_DoubleMu3  Why 18 GeV? This is expected to be nearly 100% efficient for 20 GeV selection used in the analysis (should be close to 100% efficient). AND the p T of the corresponding HLT object (L3-muon) fulfills p T >18 GeV AND (one of the 2 L3 muons has p T >18 GeV OR both fulfill p T >10 GeV) Preliminary!

Page 9T. Christiansen, C. Campagnari, B. Hegner · AOD/PAT Workshop. · CERN, 04-Sep-2009 Some Numbers:  In 100/pb, a SD with a cross-section of 110 nb would result in 11 M events. The event size in RECO is about 440 kB. This results in a RECO SD size of about 4.5 TB. In the case of AOD (~130 kB/event), the size of the SD is only about 1.3 TB.  This is something that can be easily stored at a Tier 2 and does not necessitate further skimming. This statement holds even including a safety factor of ~ a few on the openHLT cross-section for high-p T muons.  Note: The SD is complete for our mu+X analyses, in the sense that it contains everything the analysts should need, i.e. both the signal as well as the control samples for BG determination. (Note: original mu-PD rate is ~ 25 Hz) (F. Golf, J. Ribnik)