Broken Line Fit for LST - #266
Open
VourMa wants to merge 14 commits into
Open
Conversation
…ce compilation time
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
This PR includes a prototype implementation of the Broken Line Fit for the LST TCs, aiming to produce Tracks directly from the LST producer on GPU. The description of the first working version of the development was presented in these slides:
https://indico.cern.ch/event/1679835/contributions/7060909/attachments/3316119/5935962/BLFForLST_20260717.pdf
The performance is being tested on CMSSW_17, due to availability of samples, and the commits have been cherry-picked (alongside potential, small adaptations) to CMSSW_20 (this PR). I have tried to keep track of the performance for each developments, based on the CMSSW_17 branch commits. The performance corresponding to the slides above is included in in the plots from the first working version. As discussed in the meeting, a fair comparison can be made if I removed the pLSs from the "baseline". This comparison is included in this link and the result is can be found below.
Click me for performance plot!
Since then, the following updates have been done:
Click me for performance plot!
Click me for performance plot!
Click me for performance plot!
Click me for performance plot!
I am making this PR to gather feedback on the code implementation.
Known issues/future developments: