CMS Tracker Alignment DB Object Tags for Run-2
Description: History and description of alignment/surface deformation/APE tags in Run-2. Run-1 alignment constants are documented
here.
Contacts
Current multi-IOV data tags
Starting from
80X_dataRun2_Express_v9
and
80X_dataRun2_Prompt_v9, it has been introduced new Tracker Alignment tag (copy of the existing one) for the purpose of switching on the
SiPixelAli PCL for both Express and Prompt.
Summary table
TrackerAlignment_PCL_byRun_v0_hlt
Detailed information at
CondDB.
TrackerAlignment_PCL_byRun_v2_express
Detailed information at
CondDB.
Note This is a copied and updated version of tag
TrackerAlignment_PCL_byRun_v0_express.
Note: automatic uploading mode is now activated and can be monitored from
here and
here. The table above only presented IOVs from manual uploads (automatic PCL uploads are skipped).
TrackerAlignment_v29_offline
- past from TrackerAlignment_v28_offline
- TrackerAlignment_2018_ultralegacy_lowPU_v1: 318939-
- TrackerAlignment_2018_ultralegacy_VdM_v1: 318982-
- bfa1358c16281152977a1035e07897b3d720df41: 319337-
- TrackerAlignment_2018_ultralegacy_lowPU_v1: 319460-
- 889dde949a39eb76d1382f6966a4d46aeb81f1cd: 319503-
- future from TrackerAlignment_v28_offline
TrackerAlignment_v28_offline
TrackerSurafceDeformations_v1_hlt
Detailed information at
CondDB.
TrackerSurafceDeformations_v1_express
Detailed information at
CondDB.
TrackerSurafceDeformations_v1_prompt
Detailed information at
CondDB.
Note we have currently (24.07.2017) different tags in prompt and express to allow faster reaction to changing conditions during the commissioning period. This is a simply copied version of tag
TrackerSurafceDeformations_v1_express until Run 298757.
TrackerSurfaceDeformations_v13_offline
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErr_2009_v2_hlt_IOVs
Detailed information at
CondDB.
(first runs missing)
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErr_2009_v2_express_IOVs
Detailed information at
CondDB.
(first runs missing)
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErr_2009_v2_prompt_IOVs
Detailed information at
CondDB.
Note we have currently (24.07.2017) different tags in prompt and express to allow faster reaction to changing conditions during the commissioning period. This is a simply copied version of tag
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErr_2009_v2_express_IOVs until Run 298759.
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v16_offline_IOVs
- past from TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v15_offline_IOVs
- TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_2018_ultralegacy_lowPU_v1: 318939-319336
- c7b90ae711fcdaab3122a8468cfd4d551c4f46f8: 319337-319459
- TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_2018_ultralegacy_lowPU_v1: 319460-319502
- 9060d7d015c9533bd7ad413cb3f307b7c2c5f5da: 319503
- future from TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v15_offline_IOVs
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v15_offline_IOVs
Pseudo-PCL Tags
Since run 272011, the PCL alignment is running in test mode at T0.
Results are written to the following tags at the preparation DB:
Past tags
Past multi-IOV data tags summary table
Remarks:
- This was split from the express tag, see TrackerAlignment_prompt for details
Tags for data reprocessing
Ultra-Legacy (all years)
2017 Re-Reco
2016 Legacy
2016 ReReco campaign (after correction of surface deformations)
Payload Information
TrackerAlignment_PCL_byRun_v1_express
Diverts the alignment objects produced by the pixelAli at PCL to the this tag, which is not consumed by prompt; as agreed with tracker DPG for the early phases of 2017 running.
Detail information at
AlCa/DB HN announcement
TrackerAlignment_PCL_byRun_v2_prompt
Detailed information at
CondDB.
Note we have currently (24.07.2017) different tags in prompt and express to allow faster reaction to changing conditions during the commissioning period. This is a simply copied version of tag
TrackerAlignment_PCL_byRun_v2_express until Run 299228.
-->
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v10_offline_IOVs
Detailed information at
CondDB.
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v9_offline_IOVs
Detailed information at
CondDB.
Note private tag contains only 2017 payload is also created under
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_ReReco2017_v2.
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v8_offline_IOVs
Remake of offline tag created for 2017 Re-reco according to
AlCa/DB Announcement. This tag is the updated version of
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v7_offline_IOVs which contains one more payload.
Detailed information at
CondDB.
Note private tag contains only 2017 payload is also created under
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_ReReco2017_v1.
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v7_offline_IOVs
Offline tag created for 2017 Re-reco according to
AlCa/DB Announcement.
Detailed information at
CondDB.
Note private tag contains only 2017 payload is also created under
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_ReReco2017_v0.
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v6_offline_IOVs
Detailed information at
CondDB.
Details of Alignment, APE and Surface Deformation
MC Objects
MC conditions for 2021, 2023 and 2024
Tags at conddb:
Internal validations can be found
here. The announcement on HN is
here.
Ultra legacy MC conditions for 2018
Tags at conddb:
Internal validations can be found
here. The announcement on HN is
here.
Tag at
CondDB :
TrackerAlignment_MC2018_v2
- mp3027
- SG : 104X_upgrade2018_realistic_pixelCand_v1
Details of the object can be found
here. The announcement on HN is
here.
TrackerAlignment_2017_ultralegacymc_v2
Tag at
CondDB :
TrackerAlignment_2017_ultralegacymc_v2
Corresponding APEs:
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_2017_ultralegacymc_v2
- mp3149
- /afs/cern.ch/cms/CAF/CMSALCA/ALCA_TRACKERALIGN/data/commonValidation/CMSSW_10_5_0_NumberOfHitsperModule/src/Alignment/MCscenarioUL2017/move_FPIX_realistic_30plus30minus.db
- SG : Gaussian smearing of design geometry
- Alignment trying to mimic data UL17 campaign
- APEs also investigated to match the data
- Adding a systematic misalignment by hand in the FPIXes to better describe the IP vs eta in data
Internal validation is
here.
TrackerAlignment_2017_ultralegacymc_v1
Tag at
CondDB :
TrackerAlignment_2017_ultralegacymc_v1
Corresponding APEs:
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_2017_ultralegacymc_v1
- mp3149
- SG : GT 105X_mc2017_realistic_v5
Internal validation is
here.
TrackerAlignment_Upgrade2017_realistic_v3
Tags:
Description:
- use step 1 from 2018 scenario (done with 100X samples) as new scenario for 2017, fixing most WMs
- internal validation: link
- object: mp2813 jobm6
For MC V2 production campaign after bug fixed and performance optimization in TIB as announced on
AlCa/DB HN.
Tags:
Ultra legacy MC conditions for 2016
Tags at conddb:
Description:
- Alignment trying to mimic data UL16 campaign
- APEs taken from MC object
- Additional smearing added for some of the substructures on top of MP object (mp3301), to better describe the performance in data
Internal validations can be found
here (MCscenario2016_statusUL_2.pdf). The announcement on HN is
here.
Here is the
HN link that leads to
this talk.
MC Misalignment Scenarios
9 pure weak modes from starting geometry
103X_upgrade2018_design_v4:
Random Gaussian movement of the full tracker:
Random movement of one of the subdetectors:
Tag at
CondDB :
TrackerAlignment_MC2018_v1
Details of the object can be found
here. The announcement on HN is
here.
Tag at
CondDB :
TrackerAlignment_Upgrade2017_realistic_v3
MC Scenarios
9 Misaligments (pure weak modes) for
MuAl studies as described in Sandra's
presentation and
Twiki.
Run 2018
Van der Meer runs
- Description: Ultra legacy reprocessing of some Van der Meer scan runs in 2018. This alignment object starts from the UL alignment and performs a PCL-like alignment using Zero Bias tracks.
- Alignment: mp3305
- Alignment tag: TrackerAlignment_2018_ultralegacy_VdM_v1
- APE tag: No dedicated tag (TrackerAlignment_2018_ultralegacy_lowPU_v1 is fine)
Low PU runs
Special high voltage runs
Three special runs (317475, 317478 and 317484) at high voltage during 2018.
Their alignment conditions are:
Internal validations can be found
here and the hn announcement is
here.
These alignment conditions have been combined with 2017 and 2018 UL to form offline tags:
The hn announcement can be found
here.
2018 Ultra Legacy conditions
Tags at conddb:
Starting run: 314472
As the name suggests, 2018_ultralegacy only contains the 2018 part.
Internal validation is
here
Tag at
CondDB :
TrackerAlignment_HI2018_v1.
- hp2803
- pixel ML alignment to be used for the HI data-taking
Details of the object and validation
Tag at
CondDB :
TrackerAlignment_PreMD4_v1.
- mp2910 (jobm)
- a module-level alignment of the pixel detector, which goes together with new pixel templates to be used for the HI data-taking
- including the latest pixel templates: SiPixelTemplateDBObject_phase1_38T_2018_v12
Details of the object and validation
Tag at
CondDB :
TrackerAlignment_PostMD2_v1.
Details of the object and validation
Tag at
CondDB :
TrackerAlignment_PreMD3_450V_v1,
TrackerAlignment_PreMD3_400V_v1
Details of the object and validation
For Summer18
ReReco of the eras ABC(D)
Single-IOV tags for testing purposes of dependent workflows in ReRecoABC campaign, derived on representative runs in eras B and C:
The payloads are the alignment objects for the two above IOVs derived in
mp2848/jobm3:
- 12 IOV strip HL mechanical and pixel ladder/blades alignment
- pixel and strips in addition aligned at sensor level
Details are provided at
Tracker Alignment Meeting, August 21, 2018.
Tag at
CondDB :
TrackerAlignment_PostMD2_v3.
Details of the object and validation
Tag at
CondDB :
TrackerAlignment_PostMD2_v2.
- mp2830
- PCL-like alignment with 320673
Details of the object and validation
Tag at
CondDB :
TrackerAlignment_PreMD2_v1.
- mp2806
- pixel ML + strip fixed
- pre-MD2 object
Details of the object and validation
Tag at
CondDB :
TrackerAlignment_FirstCollisions2018_v3.
The first module-level alignment of the year (at least in pixel and inner strip). There is no update of the surface deformations.
Details of the object and validation
- mp2765
- Starting geometry : CRUZET/CRAFT (mp2705)
- Announcement to AlCa /DB for validation here.
Tag at
CondDB :
TrackerAlignment_CRUZET_CRAFT_2018_v1,
TrackerAlignment_StartUp2018_v2
This object contains two IOVs, one for CRUZET starting from 311450 and one for CRAFT starting from 313041. The CRAFT IOV is interested for production GT which is uploaded alone under tag "TrackerAlignment_StartUp2018_v2".
Details of the object and validation
- The alignment was done in several iterations: express GT --> mp2688 (HL) --> mp2693_jobm2 (ladder in the pixels) --> sm2515 (ladder in the pixels, best CRUZET alignment) --> mp2700 (ladder in the pixels, best CRAFT alignment)
- Then we started a multiIOV alignment, with corrections for the LA using the procedure from Gregor, starting from sm2515 for CRUZET and mp2700 for CRAFT:
- mp2702 (HL) --> mp2705 (ML in the pixels)
- Announcement to AlCa /DB for validation here.
+ APE Objects
The following APE scenarios were created with fixed APE (given in mum in the tag name) and are valid for the Phase-I detector.
APE PROD Objects:
Custom GT as starting geometry
Run 2017
2017 Ultra Legacy conditions
- Conditions: Single IOV tags TrackerAlignment_2017_ultralegacy_v1 + TrackerSurfaceDeformations_2017_ultralegacy_v1 + TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_2017_ultralegacy_v2 packaged into multi-IOV tags TrackerAlignment_v25_offline + TrackerSurfaceDeformations_v12_offline + TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v12_offline_IOVs
- Internal validation + Fine APE validation
- AlCaDB HN and TK alignment HN + Follow up message
- Local alignment object is here: /afs/cern.ch/cms/CAF/CMSALCA/ALCA_TRACKERALIGN/MP/MPproduction/um0003/jobData/jobm/um0003.db
- As the naming suggests, 2017_ultralegacy contain only the 2017 part (from run 297049)
- AlCaDB HN
- Internal validation
TrackerAlignment_v25_offline contains
- the past from TrackerAlignment_v23_offline
- TrackerAlignment_2017_ultralegacy_v1 from 297049
- and TrackerAlignment_v24_offline from 313041
TrackerSurfaceDeformations_v12_offline contains
- the past from TrackerSurfaceDeformations_v11_offline
- TrackerSurfaceDeformations_2017_ultralegacy_v1 from 297049
- and TrackerSurfaceDeformations_v11_offline from 313041
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v12_offline_IOVs contains
- the past from TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v9_offline_IOVs
- TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_2017_ultralegacy_v2 from 297049
- and TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v10_offline_IOVs from 313041
- Conditions: TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_2017_ultralegacy_v2
- History
297049 - TrackerAPE_merged_mp3029
298653 - TrackerAPE_merged_um0001
301046 - TrackerAPE_merged_um0001
301392 - TrackerAPE_merged_mp3029
303998 - TrackerAPE_merged_um0001
304447 - TrackerAPE_merged_mp3029
304663 - TrackerAPE_merged_um0001
304991 - TrackerAPE_merged_mp3029
306464 - TrackerAPE_merged_mp3115
- Conditions: Multi IOV tags TrackerAlignment_v25_offline + TrackerSurfaceDeformations_v12_offline + TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v11_offline_IOVs
- AlCaDB HN and TK alignment HN
TrackerAlignment_v25_offline contains
- the past from TrackerAlignment_v23_offline
- TrackerAlignment_2017_ultralegacy_v1 from 297049
- and TrackerAlignment_v24_offline from 313041
TrackerSurfaceDeformations_v12_offline contains
- the past from TrackerSurfaceDeformations_v11_offline
- TrackerSurfaceDeformations_2017_ultralegacy_v1 from 297049
- and TrackerSurfaceDeformations_v11_offline from 313041
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v11_offline_IOVs_fixed contains
- the past from TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v9_offline_IOVs
- TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_2017_ultralegacy_v1 from 297049
- and TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v10_offline_IOVs from 313041
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v11_offline_IOVs by mistake contained TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_2017_ultralegacy_v2 as well
TrackerAlignment_v23_offline
NB: IDENTICAL TO v21
- CondDB tag contains TrackerAlignment_v21_offline + additional IOV from mp2636/jobm1 (IOV13)
- Only update of the alignment from 305898.
- TIF HN and AlCaDB HN
Compiling information from v21 and v23:
| IOV |
since |
test run |
int. lumi/fb |
alignmet+surfaces |
APE |
Era |
| 1 |
294034 |
296173 |
0.0 |
mp2608 |
v1 |
Run2017A |
| 2 |
296641 |
297057 |
0.3 |
mp2608 |
v1 |
Run2017A |
| 3 |
297179 |
297219 |
2.0 |
mp2608 |
v1 |
Run2017B |
| 4 |
297281 |
297503 |
2.6 |
mp2608 |
v1 |
Run2017B |
| 5 |
298653 |
299061 |
6.4 |
hp2300 |
v2 |
Run2017B |
| 6 |
299277 |
299368 |
7.3 |
hp2300 |
v2 |
Run2017B |
| 7 |
299443 |
300157 |
8.1 |
hp2300 |
v3 |
Run2017C |
| 8 |
300389 |
300560 |
11.8 |
mp2608 |
v3 |
Run2017C |
| 9 |
301046 |
301472 |
15.9 |
mp2607 |
v3 |
Run2017C |
| 10 |
302131 |
302472 |
20.3 |
hp2300 |
v3 |
Run2017D |
| 11 |
303790 |
304292 |
25.3 |
hp2300 |
v3 |
Run2017E |
| 12 |
304911 |
305108 |
35.3 |
mp2607 |
v3 |
Run2017F |
| 13 |
305898 |
305898 |
37.7 |
mp2636 |
|
Run2017F |
TrackerAlignment_v22_offline
DO NOT USE!
Tags at
CondDB:
Announcement:
TIF hypernews and
AlCaDB
| IOV |
since |
test run |
int. lumi/fb |
alignmet+surfaces |
APE |
Era |
| 1 |
294034 |
296173 |
0.0 |
mp2608 |
v1 |
Run2017A |
| 2 |
296641 |
297057 |
0.3 |
mp2608 |
v1 |
Run2017A |
| 3 |
297179 |
297219 |
2.0 |
mp2608 |
v1 |
Run2017B |
| 4 |
297281 |
297503 |
2.6 |
mp2608 |
v1 |
Run2017B |
| 5 |
298653 |
299061 |
6.4 |
hp2300 |
v2 |
Run2017B |
| 6 |
299277 |
299368 |
7.3 |
hp2300 |
v2 |
Run2017B |
| 7 |
299443 |
300157 |
8.1 |
hp2300 |
v3 |
Run2017C |
| 8 |
300389 |
300560 |
11.8 |
mp2608 |
v3 |
Run2017C |
| 9 |
301046 |
301472 |
15.9 |
mp2607 |
v3 |
Run2017C |
| 10 |
302131 |
302472 |
20.3 |
hp2300 |
v3 |
Run2017D |
| 11 |
303790 |
304292 |
25.3 |
hp2300 |
v3 |
Run2017E |
| 12 |
304911 |
305108 |
35.3 |
mp2607 |
v3 |
Run2017F |
| 13 |
305898 |
305898 |
37.7 |
mp2636 |
v3 |
Run2017F |
Details:
- summary of performance at DPG meeting November 14, 2017
- final candidates and validation (incl. also non-selected test objects): TkAl meeting November 1, 2017
- APE TkAl meeting November 15, 2017
- For each IOV, hp2300 was run in three steps with 10 iterations each: first, aligning the high level structures in both BPIX and FPIX, then aligning BPIX at module level including the primary vertex constraint, then aligning FPIX (except local w) at module level. The first step used cosmics+collisions in IOVs 5, 7, 10, and 11, where there were enough cosmic tracks for them to provide a reasonable constraint; in IOV 6 there were not enough cosmics, so only collisions were used. The second and third steps used collisions only in all IOVs.
- Doc for IOV13
TrackerAlignment_forPrompt2017_v1
Post-TS2 pixel ML alignment (on top of updates by PCL), consistent with v6 gain calibration and v10 templates.
Internal reference
mp2564/jobm1.
Tag at CondDB
Details of the object and validation are discussed in
To summarize, the PV performance got improved especially in dz vs eta,
DMR in BPX similar as GT and FPX got improved. The chi2 probability plot
is included to show the difference between 0 APE and the current APE in
GT.
TrackerAlignment_StartUp17_v11
consistent with the new deployed pixel templates and new HV in strips
Tag at
CondDB
Internal ID
hp2250 (
validation)
Anouncement on
Hypernews
TrackerAlignment_forFall2017ReReco_v0 + TrackerSurfaceDeformations_forFall2017ReReco_v0
Tags at
CondDB:
Full strips-detector module level alignment, pixel HL.
Surface deformations same as
TrackerSurfaceDeformations_StartUp17_v9.
Derived against GT
92X_dataRun2_Prompt_v8 from runs 300400 - 301649 with min-bias, iso-mu, Z-mumu, and cosmics.
Internal id
mp2541/jobm1.
Details at
Tracker Alignment Meeting, 2017-08-30 in the presentations
Tags at
CondDB:
The offline tags created according to the request from
AlCa/DB HN which contain multi-IOVs from 2016 Legacy and 2017 selected payloads.
TrackerAlignment_ReReco2017_v0 + surfaces +APE
Tags at
CondDB:
Private tags are created to contain only 2017 multi-IOVs and prepare for 2017 Re-Reco as proposed in
AlCa/DB Meeting.
TrackerAlignment_StartUp17_v10
consistent with the new deployed pixel templates and the L2 timing
Tags at
CondDB:
Pixel ML alignment on 300389. Internal ID
sm2251. More information in
TkAl HN announcement.
TrackerAlignment_StartUp17_v9 + surfaces
Tags at
CondDB:
Pixel ML alignment based on Run 299592-98+299614-617. The update was to accommodate the new pixel template (v7) and the latest timing settings. Internal ID
sm2238.
Full validation at
TkAlStartUp2017/express_299380_v2.pdf,
TkAlStartUp2017/express_299592-98_smonly_v2.pdf,
TkAlStartUp2017/express_299614-17_smonly_v2.pdf.
TrackerAlignment_StartUp17_v8 + surfaces
Tags at
CondDB:
Pixel ML alignment from 2017 collision data 299327 (after magnet trip 17-Jul). Internal ID
mp2505.
Derived against GT 92X_dataRun2_express_v4.
Full validation at
TkAlStartUp2017/express_299329.pdf
TrackerAlignment_StartUp17_v7
Tags at
CondDB:
Pixel ML alignment from 2017 collision data 298996 (post TS1 with new Vcal calibration). Internal ID
hp2042.
Derived against GT 92X_dataRun2_express_v4 (includes the templates v6).
Full validation at
TkAlStartUp2017/express_298996.pdf
TrackerAlignment_StartUp17_v6 + surfaces
Tags at
CondDB:
Pixel ML alignment + surfaces from 2017 collision data, runs 298653, 298671, 298678, including cosmics runs 298647/48/51/57/58/61/68. Internal ID
hp2225.
Derived against GT 92X_dataRun2_express_v2.
Full validation at
TkAlStartUp2017/hptest_170710_298653_71_78_with9_2_0_withPCL.pdf
TrackerAlignment_from06Jul2017ReReco_v0 + surfaces
Tags at
CondDB:
Pixel ML alignment on
06Jul2017ReReco of 297664+297671 (updated VCal calibration, PH, gain calibration), based on conditions in
92X_dataRun2_July6ReReco_PixelCommissioning_v2 + dedicated templates
SiPixelTemplateDBObject_phase1_38T_2017_v6. Internal id
mp2498/jobm1.
Remarks:
TrackerAlignment_from04Jul2017ReReco_v0
Tags at
CondDB:
Pixel ML alignment on
04Jul2017ReReco of 297292 (updated VCal gain calibration), based on conditions in
92X_dataRun2_July4ReReco_PixelCommissioning. Internal id
mp2495.
TrackerAlignment_StartUp17_v5 + surfaces
Tags at
CondDB:
Pixel ML alignment + surfaces from 2017 collision data, run 297292
mp2494.
Derived against GT 92X_dataRun2_express_v2 plus
SiPixelTemplateDBObject_phase1_38T_2017_v3_hltvalidation template CPE that is appropriate for bias voltage of 200 V in layer 1, 100 V other layers.
NB: above tags are identical to the tags with same name appended by
_forHLTValidation.
TrackerAlignment_StartUp17_v4 + surfaces
Tags at
CondDB:
Pixel ML alignment + surfaces from 2017 collision data, run 297211
hp2207.
Derived against GT 92X_dataRun2_express_v2 plus
SiPixelTemplateDBObject_phase1_38T_2017_v2_hltvalidation template CPE that is appropriate for bias voltage of 100 V (fixing the wrong templates in GT).
Validation presented at tracker-alignment meeting, 2017-06-21.
Note, due to some mistake, tracker alignment contains 3 payloads corresponding to object
hp2207,
mp2494 and
hp2207. The correct object should be
hp2207 as the latest payload (hash 04d204f309394e486a187accba60ee107e517824).
TrackerAlignment_StartUp17_v3 + surfaces
Tags at
CondDB:
Pixel ML alignment + surfaces from 2017 collision data, run 296786
hp2195.
Derived against GT 92X_dataRun2_express_v2 plus
SiPixelTemplateDBObject_phase1_38T_2017_v2_hltvalidation template CPE that is appropriate for bias voltage of 100 V (fixing the wrong templates in GT).
TrackerAlignment_StartUp17_v2
Tag at
CondDB:
TrackerAlignment_StartUp17_v2
Pixel ML alignment from 2017 collision data, run 296786
mp2480.
Derived against GT 92X_dataRun2_express_v2 for appropriate runs (see below).
The object has been derived using the collision data of the runs 296786. The template CPE of the GT 92X_dataRun2_express_v2 were used in the track re-fits. It is based on the GT, which was essentially hp2026. The movement compared to the pervious object is below 50 μm, except for few modules in BPX layer1. The object mostly improves the BPX resolution in all layers, as seen from the DMR validation. The run has a more optimized timing setting for BPX.
Full set of validations (
mp2480 in dark turquoise).
TrackerAlignment_StartUp17_v1
Tag at
CondDB:
TrackerAlignment_StartUp17_v1
Pixel ML alignment from 2017 collision data, run 295463
hp2026.
Derived against GT 92X_dataRun2_express_v2 for appropriate runs (see below).
The object has been derived using the collision data of the runs 295463. The template CPE of the GT 92X_dataRun2_express_v2 were used in the track re-fits. It is based on the GT, which was essentially mp2438. The movement compared to the pervious object is at maximum ~100 μm, mostly in BPX layer1. The object mostly improves the BPX layer1 resolution, as seen from the DMR validation. The run has a more optimized timing setting for BPX, derived also a better performance in Primary vertex.
Full set of validations (
hp2026 in cyan in DMR and in black in PV).
TrackerAlignment_StartUp17_v0
Tag at
CondDB:
TrackerAlignment_StartUp17_v0
Pixel ML alignment from first 2017 collision data + CRAFT/interfill cosmics. Internal reference
mp2438.
Derived against GT 92X_dataRun2_express_v2 for appropriate runs (see below).
The object has been derived using the collision data of the runs 295209+295210 as well as CRAFT (private rereco) and interfill cosmics data. The template CPE of the GT 92X_dataRun2_express_v2 were used in the track re-fits. It is the result of several iterations with successively more degrees of freedom aligned as well as a final iteration to test the stability of the solution. We find positions of the pixel high-level structures to be within 50mum of the position in the GT, in agreement to what was earlier observed in PCL. Individual modules can have significantly larger differences. Note that for one FPX module, a position difference of 4mm is found. The local resolution (as measured by the DMRs) improves significantly, in particular in FPX. We also see different performance in the different BPX layers, clearly worst in Layer 1. We also observe that the curvature of the modules, which is assumed to be flat in the current reconstruction, is not well modeled in FPX (BPX hard to tell with given precision). In the current alignments, it is not adjusted, but this is sth. to be improved in a next iteration with mored data. The primary vertex performance is slightly improved over the GT, not much though. We assume also some interplay with the beamspot that is taken from the GT for this validation.
All modules were aligned except
- 82 modules receiving no hits at all;
- 29 modules receiving less than a minimum number of hits required for the alignment fit.
Full set of validations (
mp2438 in cyan).
TrackerAlignment_CRAFT17_v0
Tag at
CondDB:
TrackerAlignment_CRAFT17_v0
Identical to
mp2398 documented below.
Validations presented at
TkAl meeting 2017-05-17.
CRAFT17 PREP Objects
Additional comments 1
- Depends on surface conditions in GT 90X_dataRun2_Express_v4 for IOV 290550
- Includes full pixel detector, using private rereco for those runs that include BPX; simultaneous alignment of all detectors
- APE=0 in fit (fully correct covariance matrix); APE=100mum in pixel for re-fit
- Generic CPE (as templates not working)
- Entries cut 15
- Ladders/blades receiving hits (i.e. non-dead modules) but below N(hits) threshold: 6.0%. For mp2399, those ladders/blades are not aligned
- Ladders/blades without hits: 1.7% (attributed to dead modules)
TrackerAlignment_CRUZET17_v4
Tag at CondDB:
TrackerAlignment_CRUZET17_v4
Same as
TrackerAlignment_mp2397 documented below at "CRUZET17 PREP Objects"
TrackerAlignment_CRUZET17_v3
Tags at
CondDB:
A few informations from routine aligners: (mp2374)
- Starting geometry: TrackerAlignment_CRUZET17_v1
- Type of data used to derive it: CRUZET17 Express data (runs 290550-292358)
- use case for the payload: ML-FPIX alignment to improve data taking performance
TrackerAlignment_CRUZET17_v1
Tags at
CondDB:
Content:
- Pixel High-Level alignment (excluding BPIX hits): mp2358
- The first CRUZET Alignment for 2017 included in the production
- Ignoring pixel hits in the track-refit and alignment. Otherwise identical to mp2355
More details can be found
here.
Tags at
CondDB:
Content:
- Pixel High-Level alignment (excluding BPIX hits): mp2355
More details can be found
here.
Content:
- pixel is ideal
- strip from IOV 284038 in TrackerAlignment_EOY16_sm1959 (54f63024c9dff456c4c812a32bc2368a92f4e467) and from IOV 271866 in TrackerSurfaceDeformations_EOY16_mp2269 (92a2c43586e74f3d197a46af56194c6bb9780814)
New tags:
CRUZET17 PREP Objects
Additional comments 1
- Depends on surface conditions in GT 90X_dataRun2_Express_v4 for IOV 290550
- Includes full pixel detector, using private rereco for those runs that include BPX; simultaneous alignment of all detectors
- APE=0 in fit (fully correct covariance matrix)
- Generic CPE (as templates not working)
- Modules receiving hits (i.e. non-dead modules) that are not aligned because N(hits) below threshold: 1.7% (in case of entries cut 15), 10.8% (in case of entries cut 25)
- Total amount of pixel modules w/o hits: 4.4% (attributed to dead modules)
APE Objects with Fixed Values
The following APE scenarios were created with fixed APE (given in mum in the tag name) and are valid for the Phase-I detector.
APE PROD Objects:
| date |
object (DB) |
description |
| 2017-07-21 |
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_StartUp17_v5 |
APE BPIX and FPX: 5, except BPX L1 x direction (10) TIB: 5 TOB: 10 TID and TEC; 20 for TrackerAlignment_forPrompt2017_v1. |
| 2017-07-21 |
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_StartUp17_v4 |
APE (in mum): L1x: 30, L1yz: 40, L2yz20, rest in pixel: 5; TIB, TOB xyz: 10mum; TID, TEC xyz: 20mum; based on APE measurement on 299327-29 for TrackerAlignment_StartUp17_v8 and TrackerSurfaceDeformations_StartUp17_v8 |
| 2017-07-07 |
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_StartUp17_v3 |
moderately inflated over v2 pixel APE for after TS1-magnet ramp. APE (in mum): L1x: 30, L1yz: 70, L2y40, rest in BPX 20, FPX 40; TIB, TOB xyz: 20mum (as before); TID, TEC xyz: 40mum (as before) |
| 2017-06-22 |
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_StartUp17_v2 |
APE (in mum) payload based on the last measuerement with 296786: L1x: 30, L1yz: 70, L2y40, rest in pixel: 5; TIB, TOB xyz: 20mum (as before); TID, TEC xyz: 40mum (as before) |
| 2017-06-17 |
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_StartUp17_v1 |
APE payload based on the last measuerement with 296463, keeping 100mum in L1: L1 xyz: 100mum (as before); L2 y: 40mum; L2 xz; L3-L4 xyz FPX xyz: 10mum; TIB, TOB xyz: 20mum (as before); TID, TEC xyz: 40mum (as before); values based on measuerement presented at TkAl meeting, June 7, 2017 |
| 2017-05-18 |
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_BPIX50_FPIX50_TIB20_TOB20_TID40_TEC40 |
50mum in pixel; 20 mum in TIB,TOB; 40 mum in TID, TEC |
| 2017-05-18 |
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_BPIX100_FPIX100_TIB20_TOB20_TID40_TEC40 |
100mum in pixel; 20 mum in TIB,TOB; 40 mum in TID, TEC |
| 2017-05-18 |
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_BPIX500_FPIX500_TIB20_TOB20_TID40_TEC40 |
500mum in pixel; 20 mum in TIB,TOB; 40 mum in TID, TEC |
APE PREP Objects
| date |
object (DB) |
description |
| 2017-06-09 |
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_BPX-L1-Scenario_v0 |
BPX Layer 1: 500mum x,y,z; BPX Layer 2: 10mum x,z and 40mum y; BPX Layer 3+4: 10mum x,y,y; FPX,TIB,TOB: 10mum x,y,y; TID,TEC: 20mum x,y,y |
| 2017-05-17 |
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_BPIX50_FPIX50_TIB20_TOB20_TID40_TEC40 |
50mum in pixel; 20 mum in TIB,TOB; 40 mum in TID, TEC |
| 2017-05-08 |
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_BPIX100_FPIX100_TIB20_TOB20_TID40_TEC40 |
100mum in pixel; 20 mum in TIB,TOB; 40 mum in TID, TEC |
Dedicated APE Objects
The following APE objects were measured in data and are valid for the Phase-I detector.
Comment 1
- Contains the values listed in Valeria's slide 8 in the column sigma(pseudo-asym17, alignment), where I took the larger value for the z-coordinate.
- For the strips I took the values from 2016 MC scenario.
Tags:
TrackerAlignment_Phase1Realignment_CRAFT
Starting geometry: corresponding CRUZET payload (see below)
Alignables: pixel only
- ML alignment
Tags at
CondDB
TrackerAlignment_Phase1Realignment_CRUZET
Starting geometry: TrackerAlignment_Phase1Startup_Misalignment_v0
Alignable: pixel only, in two steps
- HLS alignment
- HLS+ML alignment
Different statistics are available at
CondDB:
TrackerAlignment_Phase1Startup_Misalignment_v0
Tag at
CondDB
Realistic startup scenario after installation and before any alignment procedure.
TrackerAlignment_Upgrade2017_pseudoAsymptotic_v0
Tag at
CondDB
Random gaussian smearing of the module position in BPIX and FPIX using the RMS of the BPIX and FPIX spread of the modules in the current asymptotic phase-0 scenario.
(Documentation coming soon)
WARNING: based on wrong ideal geometry. Do not use!
TrackerAlignment_Upgrade2017_pseudoAsymptotic_v1
Hybrid scenario of 2016 asymptotic MC scenario for pixel and a-priori set alignment for Phase-I pixel, based on the 2016 MC scenario in the pixel.
This scenarios was created to get a phase-1 scenario with similar performance as the phase-0 asymptotic scenario by applying the RMS values from the phase-0 pixel as gaussian smearing to the phase-1 pixel.
The values are documented
here
The strips alignment is as in the 2016 MC asymptotic scenario for MC 80X, presented at the
AlCa/DB meeting, March 7, 2016.
This scenario goes together with the "realistic" surfaces (NB: ideal in pixel, NOT ideal in strips!).
WARNING: based on wrong ideal geometry. Do not use!
MC Production Scenarios
"Ideal" alignment with fixed phase-I geometry
Original payload:
/afs/cern.ch/work/g/ghellwig/public/for_alca-db_contacts/tracker_alignment_payloads__pixel_ideal__strips_aligned_to_91X_upgrade2017_design_Candidate_2017_05_10_09_23_53.db
"pseudo asymptotic" alignment: emulating the expected asymptotic performance by applying the residual resolution of the 2016 MC asymptotic scenario (in strips: same as 2016, in pixel: 2016 resolution applied as smearing to the phase-I detector)
This scenarios was created to get a phase-1 scenario with similar performance as the phase-0 asymptotic scenario by applying the RMS values from the phase-0 pixel as gaussian smearing to the phase-1 pixel.
The values are documented
here
The strips alignment is as in the 2016 MC asymptotic scenario for MC 80X, presented at the
AlCa/DB meeting, March 7, 2016.
This scenario goes together with the "realistic" surfaces (NB: ideal in pixel, NOT ideal in strips!).
Original payload:
/afs/cern.ch/work/g/ghellwig/public/for_alca-db_contacts/geometry_MisalignmentScenario_PhaseI_PseudoAsymptotic__from_tracker_alignment_payloads__pixel_ideal__strips_aligned_to_91X_upgrade2017_realistic_Candidate_2017_05_10_16_13_16.db
"pseudo asymptotic" alignment: emulating the expected asymptotic performance by applying the residual resolution of the 2016 MC asymptotic scenario (in strips: same as 2016, in pixel: started with 2016 resolution applied as smearing to the phase-I detector, and then was scaled down to match the performance observed in EOY16 data). It is the same as
TrackerAlignment_Upgrade2017_pseudoAsymptotic_v2, but the pixel smearing factors where reduced by factors of 0.2 in FPX and 0.5 in BPX to match the DMR performance (RMS of alignment curve, RMS of ideal subtracted quadratically) in EOY16 data.
Original payload: /afs/cern.ch/cms/CAF/CMSALCA/ALCA_TRACKERALIGN/PayLoads/2017-05-12_PseudoAsymptoticMCScenario/pseudo-asymptotic_FPX-0p2_BPX-0p5.db
Documentation at Tracker-alignment meeting, 2017-05-22
Technical PREP MC payloads
Technical payload for CRUZET/CRAFT17 validation studies:
Original payload: /afs/cern.ch/work/g/ghellwig/public/for_alca-db_contacts/tracker_alignment_payloads__pixel_ideal__strips_aligned_to_TrackerAlignment_PreCRUZET2017_v1.db
Run 2016
Ultra-Legacy campaign for 2016
Candidate 1, based on the object from /afs/cern.ch/work/j/jschulz/public/merged_dbFiles/merged_mp3218.db and /afs/cern.ch/work/j/jschulz/public/merged_dbFiles/merged_mp3218.db
Candidate 2, based on the object from /afs/cern.ch/work/j/jschulz/public/merged_dbFiles/merged_mp3297.db and /afs/cern.ch/work/j/jschulz/public/merged_dbFiles/merged_mp3297.db
Candidate 2 has been packaged into multi-IOV tags TrackerAlignment_v27_offline + TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v14_offline_IOVs with the following history:
TrackerAlignment_v27_offline
0 - 271865: Content of TrackerAlignment_v26_offline in that run range
271866 - 290542: TrackerAlignment_2016_ultralegacy_v2
290543 - inf: : Content of TrackerAlignment_v26_offline in that run range
TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v14_offline_IOVs
0 - 271865: Content of TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v13_offline_IOVs in that run range
271866 - 290542: TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_2016_ultralegacy_v2
290543 - inf: : Content of TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_v13_offline_IOVs in that run range
Tags at TrackerAlignment_v19_offline and TrackerSurfaceDeformations_v9_offline
Final object
Dedicated TWiki to the EOY campaign (for technical details only!)
More information can be found here.
For APEs, see dedicated section below.
Starting conditions (v2) after new IOVs definition
- GTs to use: 80X_dataRun2_Prompt_v15_forTkAlNovCamp_singleIOV_v1 (single-IOV), 80X_dataRun2_Prompt_v15_forTkAlNovCamp_multiIOV_v1 (multi-IOV)
For single-IOV : 80X_dataRun2_Prompt_v15_forTkAlNovCamp_singleIOV_v1 is created with following conditions changed
For multi-IOV : 80X_dataRun2_Prompt_v15_forTkAlNovCamp_multiIOV_v1 is created with following conditions changed
More details at:
Zmumu studies
These tags are misalignment of the aforementionned geometries with:
Starting conditions (v1)
- GTs to use: 80X_dataRun2_Prompt_v15_forMPTkAlNovCamp_v1 (single-IOV), 80X_dataRun2_Prompt_v15_forHipPyTkAlNovCamp_v1 (multi-IOV)
For single-IOV : 80X_dataRun2_Prompt_v15_forMPTkAlNovCamp_v1 is created with following conditions changed
For multi-IOV : 80X_dataRun2_Prompt_v15_forHipPyTkAlNovCamp_v1 is created with following conditions changed
More details at:
Tags at _v18_offline and CondDB (surface deformations)
Note: this corresponds to (corrected version of) the September 2016 ReReco campaign (EOY16 Legacy alignment will be performed in November 2016)
Announcement on 10 September and on 14 October
Note: mind the v1 for surface deformations
Tags at CondDB (alignment) and at CondDB (surfaces)
- ReReco campaign before HIP mitigation
- pixel only at ML
- multi-IOV, ladder as HLS
- includes new fit of surface shape deformations
- starting from TrackerAlignment_Run2016B
- internal reference
mp2226/jobData/jobm3
- original object (wrong surface payload!) was
mp2226/jobData/jobm2
-
mp2226/jobData/jobm3 has the surfaces fixed
Note: the wrong surface deformations were in express and HLT conditions for some time (see announcement on 14 October)
Full report on indico page of the TkAl meeting of 7 September (note: documentation not up-to-date!! still correspond to the wrong surface deformations!!)
Annoucement on the hypernews
These conditions have been input in express and HLT as well (see main page the TWiki).
Tag at CondDB
- This is a copy of TrackerAlignment_v16_offline up to run 275417
- also including later PCL updates
Multi-IOV tag containing:
Test tag TrackerAlignment_v14_0T_offline at PREP2 DB.
More details at:
Tags at CondDB
This new alignment has been derived by the online PCL workflow that aligns pixel high-level structures, using the data of run 276363 which corrects for small but significant movements induced by the magnet cycle.
Tags at CondDB
This new alignment has been derived by the online PCL workflow that aligns pixel high-level structures, using the data of run 275375. More details are discussed here.
Tags at CondDB:
Tracker alignment [May Camp] started from GT 80X_dataRun2_Prompt_v8 and overwrote the following records :
with new created self-GT 80X_dataRun2_Prompt_Candidate_2016_05_12_11_59_51.
Note : The "SiPixelTemplateDBObject_38T_2016_v1_hltvalidation" tag was actually mistaken to be uploaded to SiPixelTemplateDBObject0TRcd instead of SiPixelTemplateDBObjectRcd in this self-GT candidate and the alignments were uploaded for both aligners under tags TrackerAlignment_MP_Run2016B and TrackerAlignment_HP_Run2016B.
More details at:
Tag at CondDB
Tracker alignment derived from the Pseudo-PCL workflow on run 272775 and conditions in GT 80X_dataRun2_Express_v6.
Tag at CondDB
Tracker alignment derived from the Pseudo-PCL workflow on run 272011 and conditions in GT 80X_dataRun2_Express_v6 (CRUZET alignment).
More details at:
Tag at CondDB
Tracker alignment constants starting from IOV 260335 of 2015-EOY_v1_RunD with new created self-GT 80X_dataRun2_Prompt_Candidate_2016_04_18_10_23_57. This alignment was selected as CRUZET2016 alignment.
Use with TrackerSurfaceDeformations_2015-EOY_v1_RunD
More details at:
Tag at CondDB
Use with TrackerSurfaceDeformations_2015-EOY_v1_RunD
Tracker alignment constants starting from IOV 260335 of 2015-EOY_v1_RunD with new created self-GT 80X_dataRun2_Prompt_Candidate_2016_04_18_10_23_57.
More details at:
Tag at CondDB
Tags at CondDB:
APEs for Run2016B correspond to each validation.
Presented at TkAl meeting, 2016-05-24.
Update of the following tags:
Note: This update reduces the previously employed conservative APEs of 100μm
in the pixel detector, which were put in place to take into account the
remaining uncertainties of the CRUZET-data derived pixel start-up
alignment (see below). This update is based on the conclusions from recent
validation with the Run2015A collision data and CRAFT as well as the
very latest online DQM results, which clearly indicate that the APE are
overestimated and that smaller APE would describe better the data.
Tag at CondDB.
APE for 2016 collision start-up. Conservative estimate from 2015 operation experience of 20μm in the barrel and 40μm in the endcap detectors, plus inflated APE (100μm) in the pixel to account for the foreseen magnet ramp:
Alignment and Surface Deformation Objects (MC)
Tag at TrackerAlignment_Asymptotic_Run2016_v1_mc at CondDB.
Tracker alignment constants simulating the asymptotic conditions at 2016 data taking after ~3/fb. Derived starting from the start-up scenario TrackerAlignment_Startup_Run2016_v1_mc, re-aligned at high-level with cosmics and collision data tracks at 3.8T. Depends on conditions in GT 76X_mcRun2_design_v14. Internal reference /afs/cern.ch/cms/CAF/CMSALCA/ALCA_TRACKERALIGN/MP/MPproduction/mp1982.
This alignment contains no scenario of the surface deformation.
More details at:
NOTE Has been derived relative to design local-reco conditions, therefore not usable with realistic conditions! Fix available in #TrackerAlignment_Startup_Run2016_v1_mc
Tag at TrackerAlignment_Asymptotic_Run2016_v0_mc at CondDB.
Tracker alignment constants simulating the asymptotic conditions at 2016 data taking after ~3/fb. Derived starting from the start-up scenario TrackerAlignment_Startup_Run2016_v0_mc, re-aligned at high-level with cosmics and collision data tracks at 3.8T. Depends on conditions in GT 76X_mcRun2_design_v14. Internal reference /afs/cern.ch/cms/CAF/CMSALCA/ALCA_TRACKERALIGN/MP/MPproduction/mp1961.
The alignment scenario can be used together with the existing surface deformation scenario .
TrackerSurfaceDeformations_2011Realistic_v2_mc
More details at:
Tag at TrackerAlignment_Startup_Run2016_v1_mc CondDB
Tracker alignment constants simulating the post-CRUZET 2016 start-up conditions. Derived starting from a pre-CRUZET mis-alignment scenario, re-aligned at high-level with 0T cosmics tracks (CRUZET). Depends on conditions in GT 76X_mcRun2cosmics_startup_peak_v0. Internal reference /afs/cern.ch/cms/CAF/CMSALCA/ALCA_TRACKERALIGN/MP/MPproduction/mp1971.
The alignment scenario can be used together with the existing surface deformation scenario .
This is a fix of #TrackerAlignment_Startup_Run2016_v0_mc
More details at:
NOTE Has been derived relative to design local-reco conditions, therefore not usable with realistic conditions! Fix available in #TrackerAlignment_Startup_Run2016_v1_mc
Tag at TrackerAlignment_Startup_Run2016_v0_mc CondDB
Tracker alignment constants simulating the post-CRUZET 2016 start-up conditions. Derived starting from a pre-CRUZET mis-alignment scenario, re-aligned at high-level with 0T cosmics tracks (CRUZET). Depends on conditions in GT 76X_mcRun2_design_v14. Internal reference /afs/cern.ch/cms/CAF/CMSALCA/ALCA_TRACKERALIGN/MP/MPproduction/mp1957.
The alignment scenario can be used together with the existing surface deformation scenario .
More details at:
Run 2015
General Information
How to upload new Tracker Alignments to the production GTs
First of all, one needs to create new tags to the
CondDB browser for global usage (ECAL and Muon people). More information about how to create new tags can be found in hands-on session
here.
Then, we should announce these new tags to
AlCaDB conveners (
cms-PPD-conveners-AlCaDB@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch) so they can check and give the green-light to upload them to existing GTs of HLT, Express and Prompt workflows.
After conveners signed-off, what needs to be done is to update, appending a new IOV, the 3 payloads for
TrackerAlignment,
TrackerSurfaceDeformations and APE, to the existing tags that are already included in the production Global Tags. You can check what are the latest existing production Global Tag for each workflow
here. For example, the current Global Tag of HLT is
80X_dataRun2_HLT_v12, Express is
80X_dataRun2_Express_v5 and Prompt is
80X_dataRun2_Prompt_v6.
And in order to check inside each of these Global Tags which are the relevant tags for Tracker Alignment you can use the
conddb command within a CMSSW release.
conddb list <name_of_the_GT> | grep <name_of_your_record>
(The name_of_your_record relevant for Tracker Alignment are
TrackerAlignmentRcd,
TrackerSurfaceDeformationRcd and
TrackerAlignmentErrorExtendedRcd)
This exercised on the 3 Global Tags above will yield you the table and therefore you can see there is a total of 7 tags to be updated.
All these 6 tags need to be updated. Let's retrive the sqlite files again from the new tags you just created.
conddb_import -c sqlite_file:TrackerSurfaceDeformations_2015-EOY_v1_RunD.db -f frontier://FrontierProd/CMS_CONDITIONS -i TrackerSurfaceDeformations_2015-EOY_v1_RunD -t TrackerSurfaceDeformations_2015-EOY_v1_RunD
conddb_import -c sqlite_file:TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_CRUZET2016.db -f frontier://FrontierProd/CMS_CONDITIONS -i TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_CRUZET2016 -t TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_CRUZET2016
conddb_import -c sqlite_file:TrackerAlignment_HP_CRUZET2016.db -f frontier://FrontierProd/CMS_CONDITIONS -i TrackerAlignment_HP_CRUZET2016 -t TrackerAlignment_HP_CRUZET2016
Then you should do 3 uploads (1 for each of your sqlite files) using the similar metadata files below for each record.
uploadConditions.py <name_of_file.db>
The txt files should be in the same folder as the sqlite files in which you upload and since these tags have already the correct synchronization, you don't need to specify the since (the service will automatically synchronize to the correct version).
The examples of metadata files for each record
{
"destinationDatabase": "oracle://cms_orcon_prod/CMS_CONDITIONS",
"destinationTags": {
"TrackerAlignmentExtendedErr_2009_v2_express_IOVs": {},
"TrackerAlignmentExtendedErr_2009_v2_hlt_IOVs": {}
},
"inputTag": "TrackerAlignmentExtendedErrors_CRUZET2016",
"since": null,
"userText": "APE for 2016 startup: 100um for BPix and FPix, 20um for TIB and TOB, 40um for TID and TEC"
}
{
"destinationDatabase": "oracle://cms_orcon_prod/CMS_CONDITIONS",
"destinationTags": {
"TrackerAlignment_PCL_byRun_v2_express": {},
"TrackerAlignment_PCL_byRun_v0_hlt": {}
},
"inputTag": "TrackerAlignment_HP_CRUZET2016",
"since": null,
"userText": "Tracker alignment from CRUZET16 data, correcting positions and rotations of the barrel high level structures, starting from IOV 9 of EOY2015"
}
{
"destinationDatabase": "oracle://cms_orcon_prod/CMS_CONDITIONS",
"destinationTags": {
"TrackerSurafceDeformations_v1_express": {},
"TrackerSurafceDeformations_v1_hlt": {}
},
"inputTag": "TrackerSurfaceDeformations_2015-EOY_v1_RunD",
"since": null,
"userText": "Tracker Surface deformation from IOV9 of EOY 2015 alignment"
}
Example of how to
import a payload from the DB into a local sqlite file, e.g. to prepare a tag with results of the pseudo-PCL workflow for central validation.
The following will retrieve the payload of the IOV starting with 275375, put it into the local sqlite file
SiPixelAli_PCL_v0_prompt_r275375.db and set the IOV range from 1 to infinity:
conddb_import -c sqlite_file:SiPixelAli_PCL_v0_prompt_r275375.db -f frontier://FrontierPrep/CMS_CONDITIONS -i SiPixelAli_PCL_v0_prompt -t SiPixelAli_PCL_v0_prompt_r275375 -b 275375
echo 'update IOV set SINCE=1 where SINCE=275375;' | sqlite3 SiPixelAli_PCL_v0_prompt_r275375.db
How to monitor PCL alignment workflows
- Our SiPixelAli_PCL can be monitored here as well as the others PCL. You can see there is a plot for SiPixelAli_pcl.
- If you click on the legend at the top right of pclMon page, it will explain the meaning of each color. Basically when it's white, it means no payload was uploaded but when it's green, something has been uploaded (there is also some potential delay which sometimes you might see it's purple, don't panic, it will turn green sometime later but report to AlCa /DB if it's not the case)
- Once you know if the payload has been uploaded or not, you can check the parameters on the offline DQM GUI, for example here DQM link, there is a series of plots for each run (click on Run #). You can see numbers of run from current data taking corresponding to run numbers on pclMon page and you can check DQM for those runs which have new payload uploaded.
- You can also check PV performance for example this link or on-time monitoring from this link.
- You can even double-check new payload uploaded via conddb command line, for example,
conddb list TrackerAlignment_PCL_byRun_v2_express | grep 2016-08-20
- or from condDB browser, link.
Note 1 see monitoring illustration from Chayanit's slides reported in
TkAl meeting on
24 Aug 2016.
Note 2 small tip for circulating the DQM links: click on the small anchor sign on the top right part of the screen with the "link me" text, copying the URL won't work because each user session is accessible only under his/her own GRID certificate.
CMSPublic Web>SWGuide>SWGuideCalAli>SWGuideTrackAlignment>SWGuideAlignmentConstants (2021-02-24, TamasAlmosVami)
EditAttachPDF
txt 
CMSPublic Web
Create New Topic
Index
Search
Changes
Notifications
Statistics
Preferences
Copyright &© 2008-2021 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.