Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Run2 Process Xsecs #26

Merged
merged 32 commits into from
May 25, 2024
Merged

Run2 Process Xsecs #26

merged 32 commits into from
May 25, 2024

Conversation

Bogdan-Wiederspan
Copy link
Contributor

This PR adds all xsecs for Run2

Bogdan-Wiederspan and others added 17 commits February 20, 2024 15:00
@Bogdan-Wiederspan
added higgs processes and first di-higgs processes
1146c66
@Bogdan-Wiederspan
corrected linting issues and some wrong parenthesses
c0c6a50
@haddadanas
added xsecs for top processes
7ca382c
@Bogdan-Wiederspan
checked units to be sure that everything is within pb and not fb
9f68f52
@Bogdan-Wiederspan
Merge branch 'update_run2_xsecs' of github.com:uhh-cms/cmsdb into upd…
61ff607 
…ate_run2_xsecs
@Bogdan-Wiederspan
linting fix
315a02b
@Bogdan-Wiederspan
replaced keys within xsec dictionary with ints
4af9761
@nprouvost
add cross sections ewk
81b64ca
@Bogdan-Wiederspan
fixed wrongly used numbers
55098b2
@Bogdan-Wiederspan
Merge branch 'update_run2_xsecs' of github.com:uhh-cms/cmsdb into upd…
a2c6f80 
…ate_run2_xsecs
@Bogdan-Wiederspan
added script to calculate di higgs benchmarks cross sections for hh->…
02febaf 
… bbtt nodes
@nprouvost
Merge branch 'master' into update_run2_xsecs
46952ec
@Bogdan-Wiederspan
moved script to calcualte xsecs for bsm nodes to cmsdb module
01de15e
@Bogdan-Wiederspan
Merge branch 'update_run2_xsecs' of github.com:uhh-cms/cmsdb into upd…
04c6d6c 
…ate_run2_xsecs
@haddadanas
Added missing comment + linting
41a4e95
@haddadanas
adjust module import for xsec_bsm_nodes module
b3104ad
@haddadanas
fixes for TypeErrors
3be630f
@riga
Copy link
Member

riga commented Mar 12, 2024

@Bogdan-Wiederspan What would need to be done for this PR to leave the WIP phase?

@Bogdan-Wiederspan Bogdan-Wiederspan marked this pull request as ready for review March 12, 2024 12:58
@Bogdan-Wiederspan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Nothing needs to be added @riga. I simply forgot to switch the state to "ready to review"

@nprouvost
Copy link
Contributor

Actually not completely true, I am still including updated values using the GenXSecAnalyzer directly instead of cmsdb and there will be a few new processes to include once the run2 campaigns are merged (e.g. several multibosons decay channels like ZZ->QQ)

@nprouvost
Copy link
Contributor

Updated values are now fully included with the corresponding logs and some logs expected to be needed after the merge, only the additional values which will come with the processes added with the merge are missing.

@riga riga marked this pull request as draft March 26, 2024 10:24
@riga riga self-requested a review March 26, 2024 10:24
@riga riga self-assigned this Mar 26, 2024
@riga riga added the enhancement New feature or request label Mar 26, 2024
@nprouvost nprouvost marked this pull request as ready for review April 16, 2024 13:30
@haddadanas
Merge branch 'master' of github.com:uhh-cms/cmsdb into update_run2_xsecs
16d09f4 
Conflicts:
	cmsdb/processes/ewk.py
	cmsdb/processes/higgs.py
	cmsdb/processes/top.py
@haddadanas
Copy link
Contributor

haddadanas commented Apr 24, 2024 •
edited
Loading

resolved Merge conflicts with master :)
Question (resolved): If we have a $\pm 2$% uncert is it noted in the scinum version we use as uncert=2j or uncert=0.02j? A few xsecs use the first notation
I tested it in the latest version of scinum and the latter would be correct, but I wasn't sure if the notation was different in older scinum versions.
I made a commit to correct these and can push it if the second notation turns out to be correct 😅

@nprouvost
Copy link
Contributor

Nice, thanks for spotting these

@riga
Copy link
Member

riga commented May 24, 2024

Question (resolved): If we have a % uncert is it noted in the scinum version we use as uncert=2j or uncert=0.02j? A few xsecs use the first notation

0.02j is indeed the right way to do it 👍

@riga
Copy link
Member

riga commented May 24, 2024

@nprouvost @mafrahm Are the two comments above resolved?

@riga riga merged commit 52379b1 into master May 25, 2024
4 checks passed
@riga riga deleted the update_run2_xsecs branch May 25, 2024 07:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@mafrahm mafrahm mafrahm left review comments

@nprouvost nprouvost nprouvost left review comments

@riga riga riga approved these changes

Assignees

@riga riga

Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@Bogdan-Wiederspan @riga @nprouvost @haddadanas @mafrahm