Page MenuHomeHEPForge

Updates to chi2 code
Needs ReviewPublic

Authored by johndan on Mar 2 2021, 12:33 PM.

Details

Reviewers
tlatham
Summary
  • When chi2 compares to toy data, need to specify "iExpt". Previously, all candidates were read-in indiscriminately
  • To avoid carrying around iExpt cuts or introducing error-inducing TTree::CopyTree commands, it's simpler to use RDataFrame
  • Updated the styling:
    • allow more complicated axis titles
    • show data superimposed on the chi2 plot
    • ...
Test Plan

Tested with old and new chi2 code that the same pull.pdf histogram was generated

Diff Detail

Repository
rLAURA laura
Branch
johndan-FixChi2
Lint
No Lint Coverage
Unit
No Test Coverage
Build Status
Buildable 161
Build 161: arc lint + arc unit

Event Timeline

There are quite a few things that are backward incompatible in this first iteration of the code (e.g. demanding experiment number or axis titles). I can improve that before landing.

tlatham changed the visibility from "All Users" to "Public (No Login Required)".Mar 2 2021, 1:48 PM
tlatham changed the edit policy from "All Users" to "Laura (Project)".
tlatham added a project: Laura.

Thanks for this @johndan. I'm not (yet) very familiar with RDataFrame, so bear with me while I look at that part.
I'm thinking that we could use YAML for the config file for this, which should make it more obvious what the various fields are, make it easier to deal with missing fields, etc.
I've been looking into YAML a little bit already in the context of T48 and this is actually a nicer case in which to try it out for the first time, so I'll have a bit of a play with it.

Thanks for this @johndan. I'm not (yet) very familiar with RDataFrame, so bear with me while I look at that part.
I'm thinking that we could use YAML for the config file for this, which should make it more obvious what the various fields are, make it easier to deal with missing fields, etc.
I've been looking into YAML a little bit already in the context of T48 and this is actually a nicer case in which to try it out for the first time, so I'll have a bit of a play with it.

That sounds great, thanks Tom. Let me know when you're ready for me to take a look (there is no urgency - the code above is working locally for me)