Skip to content

Conversation

@zhangbiao-phy
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@nzardosh
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @zhangbiao-phy
Very nice work. I have some final suggestions

This bit of code in the selector :

topolJpsi = selectionTopolConjugate(hfCandProng2, trackPos, trackNeg);

  if (!topolJpsi) {
    hfSelJpsiCandidate(statusJpsi);
    continue;
  }

  electronPlus = selectionPID(trackPos, 11);
  electronMinus = selectionPID(trackNeg, 11);

  if (electronPlus == 0 || electronMinus == 0) {
    pidJpsi = 0; //exclude Jpsi
  }
  if (electronPlus == 1 && electronMinus == 1) {
    pidJpsi = 1; //accept Jpsi
  }

  if (pidJpsi == 0) {
    hfSelJpsiCandidate(statusJpsi);
    continue;
  }

  if ((pidJpsi == -1 || pidJpsi == 1) && topolJpsi) {
    statusJpsi = 1; //identified as Jpsi
  }

  hfSelJpsiCandidate(statusJpsi);
  
  
  
   can be simplified to :

  if (!selectionTopolConjugate(hfCandProng2, trackPos, trackNeg)) {
    hfSelJpsiCandidate(statusJpsi);
    continue;
  }
  if (selectionPID(trackPos, 11) == 0 || selectionPID(trackNeg, 11)== 0) {
    hfSelJpsiCandidate(statusJpsi);
    continue;
  }

  hfSelJpsiCandidate(1);
  
  
  This is because in this decay we only have one mass hypothesis. Please verify if you think this makes sense.
  
  Other than this the PR looks good to me, all my requests in the previous PR were addressed. Just the MC part needs to be checked.

@zhangbiao-phy
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @zhangbiao-phy
Very nice work. I have some final suggestions

This bit of code in the selector :

topolJpsi = selectionTopolConjugate(hfCandProng2, trackPos, trackNeg);

  if (!topolJpsi) {
    hfSelJpsiCandidate(statusJpsi);
    continue;
  }

  electronPlus = selectionPID(trackPos, 11);
  electronMinus = selectionPID(trackNeg, 11);

  if (electronPlus == 0 || electronMinus == 0) {
    pidJpsi = 0; //exclude Jpsi
  }
  if (electronPlus == 1 && electronMinus == 1) {
    pidJpsi = 1; //accept Jpsi
  }

  if (pidJpsi == 0) {
    hfSelJpsiCandidate(statusJpsi);
    continue;
  }

  if ((pidJpsi == -1 || pidJpsi == 1) && topolJpsi) {
    statusJpsi = 1; //identified as Jpsi
  }

  hfSelJpsiCandidate(statusJpsi);
  
  
  
   can be simplified to :

  if (!selectionTopolConjugate(hfCandProng2, trackPos, trackNeg)) {
    hfSelJpsiCandidate(statusJpsi);
    continue;
  }
  if (selectionPID(trackPos, 11) == 0 || selectionPID(trackNeg, 11)== 0) {
    hfSelJpsiCandidate(statusJpsi);
    continue;
  }

  hfSelJpsiCandidate(1);
  
  
  This is because in this decay we only have one mass hypothesis. Please verify if you think this makes sense.
  
  Other than this the PR looks good to me, all my requests in the previous PR were addressed. Just the MC part needs to be checked.

Hi Nima, Thanks for your comments. Yes, It will make code much more simplified. In this case, I also remove the "topolJpsi".
And I make these two commit squash into one commit now.

@ginnocen ginnocen changed the title Jpsi to e+e- task and candidate selection for HF PWGHF: Jpsi to e+e- task and candidate selection for HF Dec 20, 2020
@ginnocen
Copy link
Collaborator

ginnocen commented Dec 20, 2020

h @zhangbiao-phy, thank for your work. The PR looks fine for me. There are a few things that I mentioned in my PR that we should write down and keep in mind for the next iteration. Can you make also a PR for the Run3AnalysisValidation framework if needed? I guess we will need at least some extra comparison plots, update the json file with the Jpsi cuts etc. I am ok in merging this version thus, and improving it in the upcoming PRs.

@ginnocen ginnocen self-requested a review December 20, 2020 13:43
ginnocen
ginnocen previously approved these changes Dec 20, 2020
@zhangbiao-phy
Copy link
Contributor Author

h @zhangbiao-phy, thank for your work. The PR looks fine for me. There are a few things that I mentioned in my PR that we should write down and keep in mind for the next iteration. Can you make also a PR for the Run3AnalysisValidation framework if needed? I guess we will need at least some extra comparison plots, update the json file with the Jpsi cuts etc. I am ok in merging this version thus, and improving it in the upcoming PRs.

Hi @ginnocen , Thank you for these comments. I will keep in mind all of them, and make a change for next PR. I will also make a PR for Run3AnalysisValidation.

@ginnocen
Copy link
Collaborator

@vkucera we will have to add the Lc,Jpsi and also the DDbar task which I just included in the workflow for @fcolamar (PR to be made in a few minutes). How do you suggest to do it?

@zhangbiao-phy zhangbiao-phy force-pushed the Jpsi_ee branch 3 times, most recently from 3ee9c21 to e8f2b0c Compare January 17, 2021 05:38
@zhangbiao-phy zhangbiao-phy force-pushed the Jpsi_ee branch 2 times, most recently from be7cc1b to 3911387 Compare January 21, 2021 03:31
@ginnocen ginnocen marked this pull request as draft January 21, 2021 12:13
@ginnocen
Copy link
Collaborator

trying to submit a comment to a draft PR 👍

@vkucera
Copy link
Collaborator

vkucera commented Jan 21, 2021

Testing notifications to unsubscribed owners.

@ginnocen ginnocen marked this pull request as ready for review January 22, 2021 09:29
@ginnocen
Copy link
Collaborator

hi @nzardosh @vkucera @zhangbiao-phy I made it ready for review.

@ginnocen ginnocen self-requested a review January 22, 2021 09:48
@ginnocen ginnocen merged commit d33577d into AliceO2Group:dev Jan 22, 2021
EmilGorm pushed a commit to EmilGorm/AliceO2 that referenced this pull request Nov 22, 2021
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.

5 participants