Warning when generating photon+1/2j with aMC@NLO

Asked by Isa De Bruyn

Hi,

I am generating the following process:

generate p p > a j [QCD] @0
add process p p > a j j [QCD] @1

and adding a cut on the photon pt, in order to have binned samples: 100 - 250 GeV, 250 - 400 GeV, 400 - 650 GeV, and > 650 GeV.

Everything seems to run fine, but at the end of the output I see the following:

...
INFO: Idle: 0, Running: 1, Completed: 260 [ 4m 20s ]
INFO: Idle: 0, Running: 0, Completed: 261 [ 4m 23s ]
INFO: Collecting events
INFO:
      Summary:
      Process p p > a j [QCD] @0 ; p p > a j j [QCD] @1
      Run at p-p collider (6500 + 6500 GeV)
      Total cross-section: 2.544e+03 +- 7.6e+00 pb
      Ren. and fac. scale uncertainty: +9.9% -9.6%
      PDF uncertainty: +1.2% -1.2%
      Number of events generated: 100000
      Parton shower to be used: PYTHIA8
      Fraction of negative weights: 0.33
      Total running time : 9h 29m
  Number of loop ME evaluations (by MadLoop): 1745915
    Stability unknown: 0
    Stable PS point: 1744130
    Unstable PS point (and rescued): 1781
    Unstable PS point (and not rescued): 4
    Only double precision used: 1744130
    Quadruple precision used: 1785
    Initialization phase-space points: 0
    Reduction methods used:
      > CutTools (double precision) 1739702
      > IREGI 4428
      > CutTools (quadruple precision) 1781
      > Not identified (CTModeRun != -1) 4
  Total number of unstable PS point detected: 4 (0.00%)
    Maximum fraction of UPS points in channel process/SubProcesses/P1_gu_aug/GF2 (0.03%)
    Please report this to the authors while providing the file
    /afs/cern.ch/work/i/isdebruy/MonojetNLO/CMSSW_7_1_19/src/GJets/100To250/process/SubProcesses/P1_gu_aug/GF2/UPS.log

INFO: The /afs/cern.ch/work/i/isdebruy/MonojetNLO/CMSSW_7_1_19/src/GJets/100To250/process/Events/cmsgrid/events.lhe.gz file has been$

INFO: Events generated
...

The content of the log file is:

 ===== EPS # 1 =====
 mu_r = 128.41287500947337
 alpha_S = 0.12685260064356785
 MadLoop return code, pole check and accuracy reported 420 F 8.6590707492361765E-002
 helicity (MadLoop only) 0 1
 1/eps**2 expected from MadFKS= -1.4762372668860205E-005
 1/eps**2 obtained in MadLoop = -6.4369865664907168E-005
 1/eps expected from MadFKS= -1.8104945341383236E-005
 1/eps obtained in MadLoop = -9.9017904302286513E-005
 finite obtained in MadLoop = 5.4967384969100865E-005
 Accuracy estimated by MadLop = 8.6590707492361765E-002
 1 0.135571520462559E+03 0.000000000000000E+00 0.000000000000000E+00 0.135571520462559E+03 0.000000000000000E+00
 2 0.135571520462559E+03 -0.000000000000000E+00 -0.000000000000000E+00 -0.135571520462559E+03 0.000000000000000E+00
 3 0.129336928880558E+03 0.762839241948448E+02 -0.100258904959084E+03 0.292738118135472E+02 0.000000000000000E+00
 4 0.101870999727799E+03 -0.725281631163831E+02 0.715129191216263E+02 -0.180791017703410E+01 0.000000000000000E+00
 5 0.399351123167624E+02 -0.375576107846171E+01 0.287459858374578E+02 -0.274659016365131E+02 0.000000000000000E+00

Something similar (different subprocess) happens for all pt bins, except for the 250 - 400 bin. Do you have an idea what the problem is and if this means I can not use the generated samples? Thanks.

Cheers,
Isa

Question information

Language:
English Edit question
Status:
Solved
For:
MadGraph5_aMC@NLO Edit question
Assignee:
Valentin Hirschi Edit question
Solved by:
Valentin Hirschi
Solved:
Last query:
Last reply:
Revision history for this message
Best Valentin Hirschi (valentin-hirschi) said :
#1

Dear Isa De Bruyn,

Your sample is perfectly fine. This warning simply says that for 4 out of the almost 2M points for which the virtual corrections have been computed, the result was numerically unstable and the ME weight was set to zero as a result.
This will not have any visible impact on your results. We only printed out this warning because, for us developers, it is interesting to see what are the unstable kinematic configurations so as to test different stabilization strategies on them.
So thanks for having reported it.

Revision history for this message
Isa De Bruyn (isa-dbruyn) said :
#2

Thanks Valentin Hirschi, that solved my question.