Adding the Ecal Endcaps to the ML based online ECAL DQM [13_0_X]

[abhih1]

PR description:

This PR introduces the Ecal Endcaps into the autoencoder-based online ECAL DQM feature, which was implemented for EB in #35990.
Separate Autoencoder (AE) models with ResNet architecture are trained for EE+ and EE-, apart from the model for EB, on certified good data (digi occupancy) from 2018 runs.

On giving an input occupancy map to the AE, the encoder part of the AE encodes and learns the features and the decoder reconstructs the data from the encoded latent space to match the input as closely as possible. The reconstruction loss is then calculated, which is a mean squared error (MSE) between the input and output images at a tower level. Thus given an anomalous tower, the AE which has learnt the features of the good data will have a hard time reconstructing it and give a higher loss on the anomaly than on the good towers. A quality threshold is then applied on this loss map which marks it as Good or Bad, which is then stored as an ML quality summary plot.
New correction factors are derived from 2022 collisions data to use in the pre-processing and inference, which follows the same steps as used for EB.

This PR thus introduces ML Quality summary plots for EE- and EE+, along with Loss Map and reconstructed occupancy maps from the AE.
It also introduces a trend plot to monitor the no. of bad towers flagged by the AE per lumisection in a run, as well as the map of these bad towers in an occupancy-like plot. This would be very helpful in monitoring per lumisection behaviour of bad towers/channels.

Please note that this PR should be tested along with the files added to cms-data/DQM-EcalMonitorClient#3

PR validation:

The code was validated by running the online Ecal DQM configuration and the resultant plots were examined by uploading the output file to a DQM test gui.
The new plots are confirmed and look reasonable.

If this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR. If this PR will be backported please specify to which release cycle the backport is meant for:

This is a backport to 13_0_X which is currently used in production
The master PR is: #41175

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @abhih1 (Abhirami Harilal) for CMSSW_13_0_X.

It involves the following packages:

• DQM/EcalMonitorClient (dqm)
• DQM/EcalMonitorTasks (dqm)

@emanueleusai, @cmsbuild, @syuvivida, @rvenditti, @micsucmed, @pmandrik can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@rchatter, @simonepigazzini, @thomreis, @argiro this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @rappoccio you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

• Backported from Adding the Ecal Endcaps to the ML based online ECAL DQM #41175

[perrotta]

backport of #41175

[emanueleusai]

type ecal

[emanueleusai]

please test with cms-data/DQM-EcalMonitorClient#3

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-8e6a57/31664/summary.html
COMMIT: 899875c
CMSSW: CMSSW_13_0_X_2023-03-28-1100/el8_amd64_gcc11
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/41195/31664/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

The following merge commits were also included on top of IB + this PR after doing git cms-merge-topic:

• @eyigitba Added option to trigger on loose HMT showers in EMTF #41209
• @dinyar [13_0_X] Add logic to produce "two loose showers in different sectors" in the MuonShowerProducer #41206
• @dinyar [13_0_X] Update muon shower (un)packers for 2023 running #41207
• @fwyzard [TBB] Fix concurrent_[bounded_]queue correctness on weak memory models [13.0.x] cmsdist#8358

You can see more details here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-8e6a57/31664/git-recent-commits.json
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-8e6a57/31664/git-merge-result

Comparison Summary

Summary:

• You potentially added 15 lines to the logs
• Reco comparison results: 7 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 49
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3554479
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 6
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3554451
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 1128.0539999999999 KiB( 48 files compared)
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 1000.0,... ): 20.921 KiB EcalBarrel/EBOccupancyTask
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 1000.0,... ): 7.799 KiB EcalEndcap/EEOccupancyTask
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 1000.0,... ): 3.246 KiB Ecal/Trends
• Checked 213 log files, 164 edm output root files, 49 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[emanueleusai]

tests at p5 completed

[emanueleusai]

+1

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_13_0_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_13_1_X is complete. This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @rappoccio (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[rappoccio]

hold

• The master branch PR has not been integrated nor signed, but this one was preemptively signed. We will wait for the master to converge before merging.

[cmsbuild]

Pull request has been put on hold by @rappoccio
They need to issue an unhold command to remove the hold state or L1 can unhold it for all

[abhih1]

@rappoccio The master PR has been merged.

[perrotta]

@rappoccio The master PR has been merged.

Yes. Now you must propagate the latest changes in MLClient.cc in this backport, or explain why they cannot/shouldn't be backported. Then we can unhold this

[abhih1]

@rappoccio The master PR has been merged.

Yes. Now you must propagate the latest changes in MLClient.cc in this backport, or explain why they cannot/shouldn't be backported. Then we can unhold this

The latest changes in MLClient.cc was to solve the conflict with the PR for new ONNXRuntime api 1.14.1 by #41118 related to cms-sw/cmsdist#8397

As far as I can see, this API change is not backported to 13_0_X.
The onnxruntime for 13_0_X is 1.10.0 : https://github.com/cms-sw/cmsdist/blob/IB/CMSSW_13_0_X/master/onnxruntime.spec#L1

[perrotta]

unhold

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_13_0_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_13_1_X is complete. This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @rappoccio (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[rappoccio]

+1