Difference between revisions of "Aod ntuple"
m (→Electron) |
m |
||
Line 219: | Line 219: | ||
However, you should be aware that the NN was trained in full eta range while the likelihood was computed in 3 bins in eta: barrel, crack and endcap. So I would suggest to use likelihood for now. | However, you should be aware that the NN was trained in full eta range while the likelihood was computed in 3 bins in eta: barrel, crack and endcap. So I would suggest to use likelihood for now. | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Photon == | ||
== Muon == | == Muon == |
Revision as of 10:28, 19 May 2005
This page contains basic prescriptions to get physics objects from the AOD and the AOD-based Root ntuple.
Some comments on quality selection cuts will be added as work progresses.
Electron
AOD Container Name | AOD Variable | Ntuple Variable | Variable Type | Comment | ||
ElectronCollection | ||||||
n_elec | Int | Number of electrons in the Ntuple | ||||
px_elec | Double | Px of electron | ||||
py_elec | Double | Py of electron | ||||
pz_elec | Double | Pz of electron | ||||
Double_t pt_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Double_t eta_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Double_t phi_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Int_t isem_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Int_t hastrk_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Double_t z0vtx_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Double_t d0vtx_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Int_t nblayerhits_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Int_t npixelhits_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Int_t nscthits_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Int_t ntrthits_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Int_t ntrththits_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Int_t auth_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Double_t eoverp_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Double_t etcone_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Double_t etcone20_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Double_t etcone30_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Double_t etcone40_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Double_t emwgt_elec[1000]; //[nelec] | ||||||
Double_t piwgt_elec[1000]; //[nelec] |
There are 3 types of quality cuts you can perform on the electron candidates:
- Cuts based on the
isEM
flag - Cuts based on likelihood
- Cuts based on NeuralNet output
1.
The isEM
flag uses both calorimeter and tracking information in addition to TRT
information. The flag is a bit field which marks whether the candidate passed or not some safety checks.
The bit field marks the following checks:
Cluster based egamma
ClusterEtaRange = 0,
ClusterHadronicLeakage = 1,
ClusterMiddleSampling = 2,
ClusterFirstSampling = 3,
Track based egamma
TrackEtaRange = 8,
TrackHitsA0 = 9,
TrackMatchAndEoP = 10,
TrackTRT = 11
In 9.0.4 there is a problem with TRT simulation so one has to mask TRT bit to recover the lost efficiency.
To get the flag in your AOD analysis you should use:
(*elec)->isEM()
To mask the TRT bits you should use: (*elec)->isEM()&0x7FF==0
If you use isEM
then you will select electrons with an overall efficiency of about
80% in the barrel but much lower in the crack and endcap.
2.
The likelihood ratio is constructed using the following variables: energy in different calorimeter samplings, shower shapes in both eta and phi and E/P ration. No TRT information is used here.
You need to access two variables called emweight
and pionweight
then you can construct the likelihood ratio, defined by: emweight/(emweight+pionweight)
.
In AOD, you use the following code:
ElecEMWeight = elec*->parameter(ElectronParameters::emWeight);
ElecPiWeight = elec*->parameter(ElectronParameters::pionWeight);
Then form the variable:
X = ElecEMWeight/(ElecEMWeight+ElecPiWeight);
Requiring X > 0.6 will give you more than 90% efficiency for electrons.
3.
The NeuralNet variable uses as inputs the same variables used for likelihood. To use it in AOD you should proceed as follow:
ElecepiNN = elec*->parameter(ElectronParameters::epiNN);
Requiring ElecepiNN > 0.6 will give you about 90% eff for electrons.
However, you should be aware that the NN was trained in full eta range while the likelihood was computed in 3 bins in eta: barrel, crack and endcap. So I would suggest to use likelihood for now.