-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 126
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.
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
Incorrect MET correction method #1064
Comments
Please go ahead and supply a fix. I'll be happy to review associated code changes. |
Sure, I have submitted the PR, please have a look.
If there are any issues with these codes, please feel free to point them out. |
@mcremone can you check this? |
Hi @lgray
There are two questions about MET correction:
1. It seems that
CorrectedMETFactory.py
has not been updated according to the official correction formula.In this script, propagate JEC effect to pfMET through the
corrected_polar_met
function:Can you illustrate where this correction method was referenced from?
And by checking this twiki link, I found that the formula for
MET Type-I correction
(mostly used when processing with NanoAOD) should be like:However, it is evident that in${p_{T,\text{jet}}^{L123}}$ , and jet_pt_orig is pTRaw instead of ${p_{T,\text{jet}}^{L1}}$ . This will result in incorrect MET correction.
CorrectedMETFactory.py
, jet_pt is the2. The target object for
CorrectedMETFactory.py
use with is MET, not RawMET.According to the following code, it can be seen that this script is applicable to
MET
, notRawMET
.Because in
NanoAOD
samples, only MET has branchs related toUnClusteredEnergyDeltaX/Y
, and RawMET does not have.But in NanoAOD samples, the branch names and what they correspond to are as follows:
So it is unreasonable to use
MET
because it has already undergone Type-I correction, andRawMET
should be used instead.How do you think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: