[Rivet] Compatibility of YODA reference data from Rivet with HEPData

[Andy Buckley]

Hi all,

Absurdly, I'm only now catching up on this, which got lost at the time. Glad that we do have very positive movement on this stuff now! Some feedback on the YODA feature requests etc.:
The YODA dump() methods write FLAT rather than YODA format, so the format mismatch is expected. But this could definitely be reviewed for a future version, especially if we can work toward a plotting system that takes .yoda rather than .dat as input.
I think the fuzzy equality should not be on the == and != methods, because it naturally requires an (optional) tolerance parameter: this should be a named function/method. I'm tempted to eliminate the operator entirely. Thoughts? I'll certainly do a review for consistency.
Andy
Dr Andy Buckley, Senior Lecturer / Royal Society University Research Fellow
Particle Physics Experiment Group, University of Glasgow

On May 21 2018, at 8:16 pm, Graeme Watt <Graeme.Watt at durham.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> Dear Rivet developers,
> I wrote a Python script to compare a YODA reference data file, intended for inclusion in Rivet, with the corresponding YODA file downloaded from HEPData:
> https://github.com/HEPData/miscellaneous/blob/master/scripts/yoda_compare_hepdata.py
> Example usage: ./yoda_compare_hepdata.py ATLAS_2017_I1614149.yoda -i 1614149 -a
>
> This means: compare a local YODA file "ATLAS_2017_I1614149.yoda" with a YODA file downloaded from the HEPData record with INSPIRE ID "1614149" and also compare YODA annotations "-a". Since the HEPData YODA file might contain additional analysis objects compared to the Rivet YODA file, and since there might be inconsequential rounding errors or differences in number formats, comparison using a simple "diff" of .yoda files is not always adequate.
> I had a few problems with the YODA 1.7.0 software when writing the Python script, which could perhaps be improved in future:
> * Calling dump() on Scatter objects does not output the same format as in the input .yoda files, e.g. dumping a Scatter2D gives "HISTO1D" in the output and the central value of the x bin is not output. This might be due to deficiencies in https://yoda.hepforge.org/trac/browser/src/WriterFLAT.cc .
> * I expected to be able to check (fuzzy) equality of two Scatter objects using "s == s1", which seems to be implemented in C++ but not in Python.
> * Checking (fuzzy) equality of two Point2D objects using "p == p1" is implemented in Python, but it only compares the x axes and not the y axes. Similarly, for Point3D objects, the (fuzzy) equality operator "==" only compares the x and y axes, but not the z axes.
> * In the end, I just copied the definition of "fuzzyEquals" from the C++ code into my script and did my own comparisons, without relying on the "==" operator for Point or Scatter objects.
>
> Recall that Holger Schulz made some similar comparisons in 2016 between YODA reference data files from Rivet and from the old HepData, where he found significant inconsistencies:
> https://www.hepforge.org/lists-archive/rivet/2016-October/007318.html
> https://rivet.hepforge.org/trac/browser/contrib/devscripts/HepDataConsistency
>
> While fixing all Rivet/HEPData inconsistencies is probably unrealistic for now, we could at least start by ensuring that analyses added to new Rivet releases include a YODA file that's compatible with the YODA download given by HEPData. My new script should be useful for these purposes. (This work was prompted by a conversation with Peter Skands and Jon Butterworth last month in Durham.) You're welcome to modify my script as you need and include it in a future Rivet release. The script could be run by the experiment contact persons before they upload new analyses to the Rivet "contrib" area. It could also be run (perhaps in a more automated way) by the Rivet developers when moving analyses from the "contrib" area to a new Rivet release. I just ran the script for all the new analyses in the current Rivet "contrib" area ( https://www.hepforge.org/archive/rivet/contrib/ ) and it already turned up some useful information:
> * ATLAS_2014_I1310835, ATLAS_2017_I1614149, and ATLAS_2017_I1624693, are all compatible with HEPData.
> * ATLAS_2016_I1502620 has multiple .yoda files which can't be handled by my script.
> * ATLAS_2017_I1625109 showed some apparent inconsistencies but the problem looks to be on the HEPData side. The dataset index starts at 0 (instead of 1) due to a bug in the hepdata-converter package (which I'll fix) and the year in the analysis name is 2018 (instead of 2017) taken from the journal publication.
> * ALICE_2017_I1620477 is incompatible with HEPData.
> * CMS_2016_I1487277 is compatible with HEPData.
> * CMS_2012_I1111014 and CMS_2016_I1491950 are incompatible with HEPData.
> * CMS_2017_I1499471, CMS_2017_I1635889, CMS_2018_I1662081 and CMS_2018_I1663958 are all missing from HEPData.
> * CMS_2017_I1605749 has a HEPData record, but the YODA conversion fails due to a problem with the original HEPData submission.
> * LHCF_2015_I1351909 is compatible with HEPData, but the annotations differ.
> * LHCF_2016_I1385877 is incompatible with HEPData.
>
> I hope this gives you something to discuss at this week's Rivet workshop! :-)
> Best regards,
> Graeme Watt (HEPData)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rivet mailing list
> Rivet at projects.hepforge.org
> https://www.hepforge.org/lists/listinfo/rivet
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.hepforge.org/lists-archive/rivet/attachments/20180906/cef7ec4e/attachment.html>