[PWGDQ] Using info from dalitz selected tracks in dqEfficiency_withAssoc_direct.cxx - #17629
Open
glegras wants to merge 6 commits into
Open
[PWGDQ] Using info from dalitz selected tracks in dqEfficiency_withAssoc_direct.cxx#17629glegras wants to merge 6 commits into
glegras wants to merge 6 commits into
Conversation
glegras
requested review from
XiaozhiBai,
alibuild,
iarsene,
mcoquet642 and
mguilbau
as code owners
August 27, 2026 08:46
|
O2 linter results: ❌ 178 errors, |
Collaborator
|
Error while checking build/O2Physics/o2 for f30bca7 at 2026-08-27 14:42: Full log here. |
Collaborator
|
Error while checking build/O2Physics/code-check for f30bca7 at 2026-08-27 15:41: Full log here. |
Collaborator
|
Error while checking build/O2Physics/code-check for 9cadd28 at 2026-08-27 15:53: Full log here. |
Collaborator
|
Error while checking build/O2Physics/code-check for c661260 at 2026-09-06 20:13: Full log here. |
iarsene
reviewed
Sep 7, 2026
| for (int i = 1; i <= 8; i++) { // o2-linter: disable=magic-number (number of cuts) | ||
| if (nameStr == Form("dalitzLeg%d", i)) { | ||
| cut->AddCut(VarManager::kIsDalitzLeg + i - 1, 0.5, 1.5); | ||
| cut->AddCut(VarManager::kIsDalitzLeg + i - 1, -0.5, 0.5, true); |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This might be dangerous, since the order of the variables in the VarManager is not protected by any mechanism
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am not sure I understand why it is dangerous. The reson for this change was a bug introduced in the VarManager when Maurice solved some linter errors, for which this variable is not necessarily 1 but can be 2^i. But I can also correct it in the VarManager if necessary
Comment on lines
+525
to
+536
| if (nameStr == "ePrimaryFromPi0") { | ||
| MCProng prong(2, {11, 111}, {true, true}, {false, false}, {0, 0}, {0, 0}, {false, false}); | ||
| prong.SetSourceBit(0, MCProng::kPhysicalPrimary); | ||
| signal = new MCSignal(name, "Electrons from primary pi0 decays", {prong}, {-1}); | ||
| return signal; | ||
| } | ||
| if (nameStr == "eSecondaryFromPi0") { | ||
| MCProng prong(2, {11, 111}, {true, true}, {false, false}, {0, 0}, {0, 0}, {false, false}); | ||
| prong.SetSourceBit(0, MCProng::kPhysicalPrimary, true); | ||
| signal = new MCSignal(name, "Electrons from secondary pi0 decays", {prong}, {-1}); | ||
| return signal; | ||
| } |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am not sure I fully understand these signals. I think that the decay products of primary pi0's are considered ALICE primary particles. Then, the secondary electron signal is for when you have secondary neutral pions (created from some long lived particle or from material)?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi, this is indeed to separate primary electrons from the e from pi0 from strange particle decays to check whether they have an influence in the ITS-TPC matching efficiency or not
Comment on lines
+912
to
+917
| if (nameStr == "eeDuplicated") { // check whether we have two tracks pointing to the same MC particle | ||
| MCProng prong(1, {11}, {true}, {false}, {0}, {0}, {false}); | ||
| prong.SetSourceBit(0, MCProng::kPhysicalPrimary); | ||
| signal = new MCSignal(name, "duplicated electron", {prong, prong}, {0, 0}); // signal at pair level | ||
| return signal; | ||
| } |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure why is this needed. Don't we have such a signal already ? (i did not check)
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I did not see such signal in the MCSignalLibrary. Maybe I have missed it?
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.