User Tools

Site Tools


2023:groups:smtools:start

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
2023:groups:smtools:start [2023/06/14 08:26]
sergio.sanchezcruz
2023:groups:smtools:start [2023/06/19 11:11] (current)
stefan.kiebacher
Line 12: Line 12:
     * Generators wishlist?     * Generators wishlist?
   * Including systematic uncertainties in ML based analysis ​   * Including systematic uncertainties in ML based analysis ​
-Interested people: Josh, Simon, Stefan, Vinny, Axel, Aishik, Saptaparna, Andrzej, Ana, Maria V., Gianna+Interested people: Josh, Simon, Stefan, Vinny, Axel, Aishik, Saptaparna, Andrzej, Ana, Maria V., Gianna, Chris G, Christian P, Max, Peter M
  
 +**Agreed projects:**
 +  - Perturbative benchmarks of showers [Simon, James, Daniel]
 +    - NLL, Numerical impacts ​
 +  - Interplay between shower and hadronisation [Simon]
 +    - Extending study from LH17 [[https://​arxiv.org/​abs/​1803.07977|arXiv:​1803.07977]]
 +    - Effective/​comprehensive uncertainty band
 +  - Uncertainty recommendation using available tools [Josh, Gianna]
 +    - Setup 4-point variations of all combinations of shower and hadronisation model
 +    - Tune these in a consistent way to get an uncertainty envelope ​
 +  - Tuning strategies [Stefan K]
 +    - What is currently done?
 +    - Common framework?
 +    - Better documentation of existing framework
 +    - Benchmark sets of data
  
  
-===Generator software and computing considerations [Friday 11h00-12h30 ​QCD room]===+===Generator software and computing considerations [Friday 11h00-12h30 ​Auditorium]===
 Slack channel: #​gen-soft-comp Slack channel: #​gen-soft-comp
  
Line 24: Line 38:
   * GPU/​Vectorisation   * GPU/​Vectorisation
   * Event format/​sharing   * Event format/​sharing
-  * Containerisation/​preservation/​reproducibility  +  * Containerisation/​preservation/​reproducibility 
-Interested people: Josh, Vinny, Andrea, Stefan, Saptaparna, Maria V., Sergio +  * Use of ML 
 +  * Common frameworks 
 +Interested people: Josh, Vinny, Andrea, Stefan, Saptaparna, Maria V., Sergio, Chris G, Christian P, Ana, Max, Peter M, Simon, Sudeepan
  
 +**Agreed projects:**
 +  - GPU/​Vectorisation/​HPC [Josh]
 +    - Experience porting codes
 +    - Workflows in experiments ​
 +      - How would code be run in practise
 +      - How to get/confirm allocations
 +      - Sharing of resources between EXP and TH
 +  - Computing performance [Josh]
 +    - Benchmarking current code
 +      - Also with examples from EXP
 +    - Accounting in experiments
 +    - Projections for future N(2,3)LO calculations
 +  - Updates to interfaces [Josh]
 +    - Interoperability of models
 +    - Modular framework
 +    - Multi-event API in MC generators
 +      - Resampling
 +  - Accessibility of tools [Josh]
 +    - Containerisation and reproducibility ​
 +      - Docker images, run cards, Rivet routines, Yoda files -> HepData
 +      - Use these tools to make LH studies reproducible
 +      - Can at Docker-based workflow on e.g. lxplus be documented to lower barrier to entry for MC studies?
 +      - Make sure cards actually used by EXP are uploaded with TH prediction Yoda files.
 +      - Make available for benchmarking (c.f. point 2.), including full chain in EXP
 +    - MC Generation generic tool/​interface
 +      - Like MCPlots
 +  - Event formats [Josh]
 +    - New HDF5 standard <- LHEF/​HepMC ​
 +      - Easier event sharing, smaller disk footprint
 +    - Need for more information in intermediate stages of generation?
 +    - Sample sharing between experiments
 +      - Joint/cross validation
 +  - ML for MC []
 +    - Interoperability link to point 3. (swapping out parts of generation in modular framework)
 +    - Discussion of exact vs approximate use of ML
 +  - Resampling/​reweighting [Josh]
 +    - Reweighting and derivative-based optimisation
 +    - Resampling to eliminate negative weights
 +      - NN and cell-based tools
 +      - Stress tests of these tools?
 +        - Problem areas from TH PoV
 +        - Validation at scale in EXP
  
 ===ttW modelling studies [TBC]=== ===ttW modelling studies [TBC]===
Line 41: Line 98:
   * Possibly connecting to ttW?   * Possibly connecting to ttW?
 Interested people: Simon, Axel, Andrzej Interested people: Simon, Axel, Andrzej
 +
 +=== Interplay between showers and hadronization ===
 +
 +  * Hadronization model should respond to shower IR cut variations
 +  * Study IR ctuoff dependence, map out how purely perturbative variations compare
 +  * goal is to update the LH 17 study on retuning with a more solid theory framework
 +
 +Interested: Simon, Andrzej, Stefan K.
 +
 +
 +===Tuning Accord and Strategies===
 +  * What is currently done:
 +    - Common framework for tuning exist, but no single script to run
 +      - Nice to have a script, which automatically prints exactly what is done and with which flags
 +    - Every generator team does tuning on their own
 +    - Almost no documentation on the tunes provided
 +      - Rarely publicly available weights
 +      - Rarely publicly available tuning options (samples, interpolation order, flags used, ...)
 +      - Often post-processing tune by eye
 +  * Goals of the project:
 +    - Coordination among generator authors of Herwig, Pythia and Sherpa (mattermost channel?)
 +    - Common framework for tuning exist, but no single reproducible script:
 +      - Stefan K. trying to provide this in Professor, which automatically documents what version, options, flags, etc. are being run 
 +      - Someone could do something similar in Apprentice
 +    - Les Houches Accord on some Benchmark observable+weight sets:
 +      - Observable quality & quantity requirements:​
 +        - No ratio Rivets if full information is available?
 +        - Reduce double counting of observables:​
 +          - No gaps in histogram (see e.g. some ALEPH identified particle momentum distribution)
 +          - Smaller bin-width is preferred
 +          - Enough statistics:
 +            - NOTE: If the errors of the data are to small a theory uncertainty should be provided to the tuning framework otherwise the minimization will likely over-fit this data
 +      - Benchmark sets:
 +        - Conservative set of selected (IRC safe?) Event Shapes:
 +          - Input from perturbative experts needed
 +          - Only close to the peak, where hadronization is not dominant
 +        - Provide global sets from each generator to gather information
 +        - Ultimate goals:
 +          - Minimal set of accorded observables+weights among all generators for comparability
 +            - Tune using $\chi^2$ (more strict) and $\chi^2/​(1+\chi^2)$ (less strict)
 +          - Maximal set of accorded observables+weights among all generators for comparability
 +            - Tune using $\chi^2$ (more strict) and $\chi^2/​(1+\chi^2)$ (less strict)
 +    - Provide recommendations to experiments on tuning?
 +      - ...
 +
 +Interested: Simon, Andrzej, Stefan K., ....
  
  
Line 62: Line 165:
   * New unfolding observables   * New unfolding observables
   * Interoperability/​practical considerations   * Interoperability/​practical considerations
-Interested people: Vinny,Josh, Aishik, Andrzej, Maria V.+Interested people: Vinny,Josh, Aishik, Andrzej, Maria V., Peter M
  
  
Line 73: Line 176:
   * Impact of NNPDF + FPF data on LHC precision, e.g. W-mass   * Impact of NNPDF + FPF data on LHC precision, e.g. W-mass
  
-Interested people: Josh, Maria V., Stefan+Interested people: Josh, Maria V., Stefan, Peter M (EIC)
  
2023/groups/smtools/start.1686724007.txt.gz · Last modified: 2023/06/14 08:26 by sergio.sanchezcruz