MadGraph5_aMC@NLO

MadSpin: Z decay ------ KeyError : ((-1, 1), (23, 23, 23))

Asked by Yue Xu

Dear all,

I'm using MadGraph version 2.6.6. The process is :
import model HC_UFO
define p = g u c d s b u~ c~ d~ s~ b~
define j = g u c d s b u~ c~ d~ s~ b~
define l+ = e+ mu+ ta+
define l- = e- mu- ta-
generate p p > z x0, x0 > z z

And I used reweight technique and madspin to decay Z. The reweight card is:
launch --rwgt_name=fw1000fww2414
 set FRBLOCK 16 1.44408
 set FRBLOCK 18 2.00897
 set FRBLOCK 21 -0.262405
 set FRBLOCK 22 -0.262405
 set DECAY 5000000 auto

The madspin card is :
 set max_weight_ps_point 400 # number of PS to estimate the maximum for each event
 decay z > all all
# running the actual code
 launch

I can run the reweighting successfully, but there are some errors when using the madspin.

May you help me to solve it?

Thanks in advance,
Yue

The output is:
INFO: generating the production square matrix element
INFO: generate p p > z x0, x0 > z z;
INFO: Done 3.099
INFO: generating the full matrix element squared (with decay)
INFO: generate p p > z x0, z > all all QCD=99, ( x0 > z z, z > all all QCD=99) --no_warning=duplicate;
INFO: Done 237.9
INFO: generate matrix element for decay only (1 - > N).
INFO: output standalone_msF /home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/TEMP/HC_rw_zzz/decay_me
INFO: Done 2.317
INFO: Compiling code
INFO: detect independant decays
INFO: Done in 0.405424118042s
INFO:
INFO: Estimating the maximum weight
INFO: *****************************
INFO: Probing the first 139 events
INFO: with 400 phase space points
INFO:
Command "launch " interrupted with error:
KeyError : ((-1, 1), (23, 23, 23))
Please report this bug on https://bugs.launchpad.net/mg5amcnlo
More information is found in '/home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/TEMP/HC_rw_zzz/run_58_tag_1_debug.log'.
Please attach this file to your report.

The run_58_tag_1_debug.log is:

#* * * *
#* * * * * *
#* * * * * 5 * * * * *
#* * * * * *
#* * * *
#* *
#* *
#* VERSION 2.6.6 20xx-xx-xx *
#* *
#* The MadGraph5_aMC@NLO Development Team - Find us at *
#* https://server06.fynu.ucl.ac.be/projects/madgraph *
#* *
#************************************************************
#* *
#* Command File for MadEvent *
#* *
#* run as ./bin/madevent.py filename *
#* *
#************************************************************
launch
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/TEMP/HC_rw_zzz/bin/internal/extended_cmd.py", line 1514, in onecmd
    return self.onecmd_orig(line, **opt)
  File "/home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/TEMP/HC_rw_zzz/bin/internal/extended_cmd.py", line 1463, in onecmd_orig
    return func(arg, **opt)
  File "/home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/TEMP/HC_rw_zzz/bin/internal/madevent_interface.py", line 2670, in do_launch
    self.do_generate_events(line, *args, **opt)
  File "/home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/TEMP/HC_rw_zzz/bin/internal/madevent_interface.py", line 2469, in do_generate_events
    self.run_generate_events(switch_mode, args)
  File "/home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/TEMP/HC_rw_zzz/bin/internal/common_run_interface.py", line 6929, in new_fct
    original_fct(obj, *args, **opts)
  File "/home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/TEMP/HC_rw_zzz/bin/internal/madevent_interface.py", line 2566, in run_generate_events
    self.exec_cmd('decay_events -from_cards', postcmd=False)
  File "/home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/TEMP/HC_rw_zzz/bin/internal/extended_cmd.py", line 1543, in exec_cmd
    stop = Cmd.onecmd_orig(current_interface, line, **opt)
  File "/home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/TEMP/HC_rw_zzz/bin/internal/extended_cmd.py", line 1463, in onecmd_orig
    return func(arg, **opt)
  File "/home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/TEMP/HC_rw_zzz/bin/internal/common_run_interface.py", line 3694, in do_decay_events
    madspin_cmd.import_command_file(path)
  File "/home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/madgraph/interface/extended_cmd.py", line 1660, in import_command_file
    self.exec_cmd(line, precmd=True)
  File "/home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/madgraph/interface/extended_cmd.py", line 1543, in exec_cmd
    stop = Cmd.onecmd_orig(current_interface, line, **opt)
  File "/home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/madgraph/interface/extended_cmd.py", line 1463, in onecmd_orig
    return func(arg, **opt)
  File "/home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/madgraph/various/misc.py", line 100, in f_with_no_logger
    out = f(self, *args, **opt)
  File "/home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/MadSpin/interface_madspin.py", line 620, in do_launch
    generate_all.run()
  File "/home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/MadSpin/decay.py", line 2118, in run
    self.get_max_weight_from_event(decay_mapping)
  File "/home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/MadSpin/decay.py", line 3110, in get_max_weight_from_event
    production_tag, event_map = self.load_event()
  File "/home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/MadSpin/decay.py", line 3249, in load_event
    P_order = self.all_ME[production_tag]['tag2order'][production_tag]
KeyError: ((-1, 1), (23, 23, 23))
                              Run Options
                              -----------
               stdout_level : None

                         MadEvent Options
                         ----------------
     automatic_html_opening : False (user set)
        notification_center : True
          cluster_temp_path : None
             cluster_memory : None
               cluster_size : 100
              cluster_queue : None
                    nb_core : 48 (user set)
               cluster_time : None
                   run_mode : 2

                      Configuration Options
                      ---------------------
                text_editor : None
         cluster_local_path : None
      cluster_status_update : (600, 30)
               pythia8_path : /home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/HEPTools/pythia8 (user set)
                  hwpp_path : None (user set)
            pythia-pgs_path : None (user set)
                    td_path : None (user set)
               delphes_path : None (user set)
                thepeg_path : None (user set)
               cluster_type : condor
          madanalysis5_path : None (user set)
           cluster_nb_retry : 1
                 eps_viewer : None
                web_browser : None
               syscalc_path : None (user set)
           madanalysis_path : None (user set)
                     lhapdf : /home/storage/Users/xuyue/HeavyHiggs/plot_heavy/MG5_aMC_v2_6_6/HEPTools/lhapdf6/bin/lhapdf-config (user set)
              f2py_compiler : None
                 hepmc_path : None (user set)
         cluster_retry_wait : 300
           fortran_compiler : None
                auto_update : 7 (user set)
        exrootanalysis_path : None (user set)
                    timeout : 60
               cpp_compiler : None
#************************************************************
#* MadGraph5_aMC@NLO *
#* *
#* * * *
#* * * * * *
#* * * * * 5 * * * * *
#* * * * * *
#* * * *
#* *
#* *
#* VERSION 2.6.6 2018-06-28 *
#* *
#* The MadGraph5_aMC@NLO Development Team - Find us at *
#* https://server06.fynu.ucl.ac.be/projects/madgraph *
#* *
#************************************************************
#* *
#* Command File for MadGraph5_aMC@NLO *
#* *
#* run as ./bin/mg5_aMC filename *
#* *
#************************************************************
set default_unset_couplings 99
set group_subprocesses Auto
set ignore_six_quark_processes False
set loop_optimized_output True
set loop_color_flows False
set gauge unitary
set complex_mass_scheme False
set max_npoint_for_channel 0
import model sm
define p = g u c d s u~ c~ d~ s~
define j = g u c d s u~ c~ d~ s~
define l+ = e+ mu+
define l- = e- mu-
define vl = ve vm vt
define vl~ = ve~ vm~ vt~
import model HC_UFO
define p = g u c d s b u~ c~ d~ s~ b~
define j = g u c d s b u~ c~ d~ s~ b~
define l+ = e+ mu+ ta+
define l- = e- mu- ta-
generate p p > z x0, x0 > z z
output ./TEMP/HC_rw_zzz
######################################################################
## PARAM_CARD AUTOMATICALY GENERATED BY MG5 ####
######################################################################
###################################
## INFORMATION FOR CKMBLOCK
###################################
BLOCK CKMBLOCK #
      1 2.277360e-01 # cabi
###################################
## INFORMATION FOR FRBLOCK
###################################
BLOCK FRBLOCK #
      1 5.000000e+03 # lambda
      2 1.000000e+00 # ca
      3 5.000000e-02 # ksm
      4 0.000000e+00 # khtt
      5 0.000000e+00 # katt
      6 0.000000e+00 # khbb
      7 0.000000e+00 # kabb
      8 0.000000e+00 # khll
      9 0.000000e+00 # kall
      10 0.000000e+00 # khaa
      11 0.000000e+00 # kaaa
      12 0.000000e+00 # khza
      13 0.000000e+00 # kaza
      14 0.000000e+00 # khgg
      15 0.000000e+00 # kagg
      16 -2.493700e+00 # khzz
      17 0.000000e+00 # kazz
      18 -3.058590e+00 # khww
      19 0.000000e+00 # kaww
      20 0.000000e+00 # khda
      21 -2.624050e-01 # khdz
      22 -2.624050e-01 # khdwr
      23 0.000000e+00 # khdwi
      24 1.000000e+00 # khhgg
      25 1.000000e+00 # kaagg
      26 1.000000e+00 # kqa
      27 1.000000e+00 # kqb
      28 1.000000e+00 # kla
      29 1.000000e+00 # klb
      30 1.000000e+00 # kw1
      31 1.000000e+00 # kw2
      32 0.000000e+00 # kw3
      33 0.000000e+00 # kw4
      34 0.000000e+00 # kw5
      35 0.000000e+00 # kz1
      36 1.000000e+00 # kz3
      37 0.000000e+00 # kz5
      38 1.000000e+00 # kq
      39 1.000000e+00 # kq3
      40 1.000000e+00 # kl
      41 1.000000e+00 # kg
      42 1.000000e+00 # ka
      43 1.000000e+00 # kz
      44 1.000000e+00 # kw
      45 0.000000e+00 # kza
###################################
## INFORMATION FOR MASS
###################################
BLOCK MASS #
      5 4.700000e+00 # mb
      6 1.720000e+02 # mt
      15 1.777000e+00 # mta
      23 9.118760e+01 # mz
      5000000 6.000000e+02 # mx0
      5000001 1.250000e+02 # mx1
      5000002 1.250000e+02 # mx2
      1 0.000000e+00 # d : 0.0
      2 0.000000e+00 # u : 0.0
      3 0.000000e+00 # s : 0.0
      4 0.000000e+00 # c : 0.0
      11 0.000000e+00 # e- : 0.0
      12 0.000000e+00 # ve : 0.0
      13 0.000000e+00 # mu- : 0.0
      14 0.000000e+00 # vm : 0.0
      16 0.000000e+00 # vt : 0.0
      21 0.000000e+00 # g : 0.0
      22 0.000000e+00 # a : 0.0
      24 7.982436e+01 # w+ : cmath.sqrt(mz__exp__2/2. + cmath.sqrt(mz__exp__4/4. - (aew*cmath.pi*mz__exp__2)/(gf*sqrt__2)))
###################################
## INFORMATION FOR SMINPUTS
###################################
BLOCK SMINPUTS #
      1 1.279000e+02 # aewm1
      2 1.166370e-05 # gf
      3 1.184000e-01 # as
###################################
## INFORMATION FOR YUKAWA
###################################
BLOCK YUKAWA #
      5 4.700000e+00 # ymb
      6 1.720000e+02 # ymt
      15 1.777000e+00 # ymtau
###################################
## INFORMATION FOR QNUMBERS 5000000
###################################
BLOCK QNUMBERS 5000000 # x0
      1 0 # 3 times electric charge
      2 1 # number of spin states (2s+1)
      3 1 # colour rep (1: singlet, 3: triplet, 8: octet)
      4 0 # particle/antiparticle distinction (0=own anti)
###################################
## INFORMATION FOR QNUMBERS 5000001
###################################
BLOCK QNUMBERS 5000001 # x1
      1 0 # 3 times electric charge
      2 3 # number of spin states (2s+1)
      3 1 # colour rep (1: singlet, 3: triplet, 8: octet)
      4 0 # particle/antiparticle distinction (0=own anti)
###################################
## INFORMATION FOR QNUMBERS 5000002
###################################
BLOCK QNUMBERS 5000002 # x2
      1 0 # 3 times electric charge
      2 5 # number of spin states (2s+1)
      3 1 # colour rep (1: singlet, 3: triplet, 8: octet)
      4 0 # particle/antiparticle distinction (0=own anti)
#
#*************************
# Decay widths *
#*************************
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 1 0.000000e+00
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 2 0.000000e+00
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 3 0.000000e+00
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 4 0.000000e+00
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 5 0.000000e+00
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 6 1.508336e+00
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 11 0.000000e+00
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 12 0.000000e+00
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 13 0.000000e+00
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 14 0.000000e+00
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 15 0.000000e+00
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 16 0.000000e+00
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 21 0.000000e+00
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 22 0.000000e+00
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 23 2.495200e+00
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 24 2.085000e+00
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 5000000 1.024120e+00
# BR NDA ID1 ID2 ...
   7.520115e-01 2 -24 24 # 0.77015001738
   2.479885e-01 2 23 23 # 0.25396998262
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 5000001 4.070000e-03
#
# PDG Width
DECAY 5000002 4.070000e-03
#*********************************************************************
# MadGraph5_aMC@NLO *
# *
# run_card.dat MadEvent *
# *
# This file is used to set the parameters of the run. *
# *
# Some notation/conventions: *
# *
# Lines starting with a '# ' are info or comments *
# *
# mind the format: value = variable ! comment *
# *
# To display more options, you can type the command: *
# update full_run_card *
#*********************************************************************
#
#*******************
# Running parameters
#*******************
#
#*********************************************************************
# Tag name for the run (one word) *
#*********************************************************************
  tag_1 = run_tag ! name of the run
#*********************************************************************
# Number of events and rnd seed *
# Warning: Do not generate more than 1M events in a single run *
#*********************************************************************
  100000 = nevents ! Number of unweighted events requested
  0 = iseed ! rnd seed (0=assigned automatically=default))
#*********************************************************************
# Collider type and energy *
# lpp: 0=No PDF, 1=proton, -1=antiproton, 2=photon from proton, *
# 3=photon from electron *
#*********************************************************************
     1 = lpp1 ! beam 1 type
     1 = lpp2 ! beam 2 type
     6500.0 = ebeam1 ! beam 1 total energy in GeV
     6500.0 = ebeam2 ! beam 2 total energy in GeV
# To see polarised beam options: type "update beam_pol"
#*********************************************************************
# PDF CHOICE: this automatically fixes also alpha_s and its evol. *
#*********************************************************************
     nn23lo1 = pdlabel ! PDF set
     230000 = lhaid ! if pdlabel=lhapdf, this is the lhapdf number
# To see heavy ion options: type "update ion_pdf"
#*********************************************************************
# Renormalization and factorization scales *
#*********************************************************************
 False = fixed_ren_scale ! if .true. use fixed ren scale
 False = fixed_fac_scale ! if .true. use fixed fac scale
 91.188 = scale ! fixed ren scale
 91.188 = dsqrt_q2fact1 ! fixed fact scale for pdf1
 91.188 = dsqrt_q2fact2 ! fixed fact scale for pdf2
 3 = dynamical_scale_choice ! Choose one of the preselected dynamical choices
 1.0 = scalefact ! scale factor for event-by-event scales
#*********************************************************************
# Type and output format
#*********************************************************************
  False = gridpack !True = setting up the grid pack
  -1.0 = time_of_flight ! threshold (in mm) below which the invariant livetime is not written (-1 means not written)
  3.0 = lhe_version ! Change the way clustering information pass to shower.
  True = clusinfo ! include clustering tag in output
  average = event_norm ! average/sum. Normalization of the weight in the LHEF

#*********************************************************************
# Matching parameter (MLM only)
#*********************************************************************
 0 = ickkw ! 0 no matching, 1 MLM
 1.0 = alpsfact ! scale factor for QCD emission vx
 False = chcluster ! cluster only according to channel diag
 5 = asrwgtflavor ! highest quark flavor for a_s reweight
 False = auto_ptj_mjj ! Automatic setting of ptj and mjj if xqcut >0
                                   ! (turn off for VBF and single top processes)
 0.0 = xqcut ! minimum kt jet measure between partons
#*********************************************************************
#
#*********************************************************************
# handling of the helicities:
# 0: sum over all helicities
# 1: importance sampling over helicities
#*********************************************************************
   0 = nhel ! using helicities importance sampling or not.
#*********************************************************************
# Generation bias, check the wiki page below for more information: *
# 'cp3.irmp.ucl.ac.be/projects/madgraph/wiki/LOEventGenerationBias' *
#*********************************************************************
 None = bias_module ! Bias type of bias, [None, ptj_bias, -custom_folder-]
 {} = bias_parameters ! Specifies the parameters of the module.
#
#*******************************
# Parton level cuts definition *
#*******************************
#
#
#*********************************************************************
# BW cutoff (M+/-bwcutoff*Gamma) ! Define on/off-shell for "$" and decay
#*********************************************************************
  15.0 = bwcutoff ! (M+/-bwcutoff*Gamma)
#*********************************************************************
# Apply pt/E/eta/dr/mij/kt_durham cuts on decay products or not
# (note that etmiss/ptll/ptheavy/ht/sorted cuts always apply)
#*********************************************************************
   False = cut_decays ! Cut decay products
#*********************************************************************
# Standard Cuts *
#*********************************************************************
# Minimum and maximum pt's (for max, -1 means no cut) *
#*********************************************************************
 20.0 = ptj ! minimum pt for the jets
 0.0 = ptb ! minimum pt for the b
 10.0 = pta ! minimum pt for the photons
 10.0 = ptl ! minimum pt for the charged leptons
 0.0 = misset ! minimum missing Et (sum of neutrino's momenta)
 -1.0 = ptjmax ! maximum pt for the jets
 -1.0 = ptbmax ! maximum pt for the b
 -1.0 = ptamax ! maximum pt for the photons
 -1.0 = ptlmax ! maximum pt for the charged leptons
 -1.0 = missetmax ! maximum missing Et (sum of neutrino's momenta)
 {} = pt_min_pdg ! pt cut for other particles (use pdg code). Applied on particle and anti-particle
 {} = pt_max_pdg ! pt cut for other particles (syntax e.g. {6: 100, 25: 50})
#
# For display option for energy cut in the partonic center of mass frame type 'update ecut'
#
#*********************************************************************
# Maximum and minimum absolute rapidity (for max, -1 means no cut) *
#*********************************************************************
  5.0 = etaj ! max rap for the jets
  -1.0 = etab ! max rap for the b
 2.5 = etaa ! max rap for the photons
 2.5 = etal ! max rap for the charged leptons
 0.0 = etajmin ! min rap for the jets
 0.0 = etabmin ! min rap for the b
 0.0 = etaamin ! min rap for the photons
 0.0 = etalmin ! main rap for the charged leptons
 {} = eta_min_pdg ! rap cut for other particles (use pdg code). Applied on particle and anti-particle
 {} = eta_max_pdg ! rap cut for other particles (syntax e.g. {6: 2.5, 23: 5})
#*********************************************************************
# Minimum and maximum DeltaR distance *
#*********************************************************************
 0.4 = drjj ! min distance between jets
 0.0 = drbb ! min distance between b's
 0.4 = drll ! min distance between leptons
 0.4 = draa ! min distance between gammas
 0.0 = drbj ! min distance between b and jet
 0.4 = draj ! min distance between gamma and jet
 0.4 = drjl ! min distance between jet and lepton
 0.0 = drab ! min distance between gamma and b
 0.0 = drbl ! min distance between b and lepton
 0.4 = dral ! min distance between gamma and lepton
 -1.0 = drjjmax ! max distance between jets
 -1.0 = drbbmax ! max distance between b's
 -1.0 = drllmax ! max distance between leptons
 -1.0 = draamax ! max distance between gammas
 -1.0 = drbjmax ! max distance between b and jet
 -1.0 = drajmax ! max distance between gamma and jet
 -1.0 = drjlmax ! max distance between jet and lepton
 -1.0 = drabmax ! max distance between gamma and b
 -1.0 = drblmax ! max distance between b and lepton
 -1.0 = dralmax ! maxdistance between gamma and lepton
#*********************************************************************
# Minimum and maximum invariant mass for pairs *
# WARNING: for four lepton final state mmll cut require to have *
# different lepton masses for each flavor! *
#*********************************************************************
 0.0 = mmjj ! min invariant mass of a jet pair
 0.0 = mmbb ! min invariant mass of a b pair
 0.0 = mmaa ! min invariant mass of gamma gamma pair
 0.0 = mmll ! min invariant mass of l+l- (same flavour) lepton pair
 -1.0 = mmjjmax ! max invariant mass of a jet pair
 -1.0 = mmbbmax ! max invariant mass of a b pair
 -1.0 = mmaamax ! max invariant mass of gamma gamma pair
 -1.0 = mmllmax ! max invariant mass of l+l- (same flavour) lepton pair
 {} = mxx_min_pdg ! min invariant mass of a pair of particles X/X~ (e.g. {6:250})
 {'default': False} = mxx_only_part_antipart ! if True the invariant mass is applied only
                       ! to pairs of particle/antiparticle and not to pairs of the same pdg codes.
#*********************************************************************
# Minimum and maximum invariant mass for all letpons *
#*********************************************************************
 0.0 = mmnl ! min invariant mass for all letpons (l+- and vl)
 -1.0 = mmnlmax ! max invariant mass for all letpons (l+- and vl)
#*********************************************************************
# Minimum and maximum pt for 4-momenta sum of leptons *
#*********************************************************************
 0.0 = ptllmin ! Minimum pt for 4-momenta sum of leptons(l and vl)
 -1.0 = ptllmax ! Maximum pt for 4-momenta sum of leptons(l and vl)
#*********************************************************************
# Inclusive cuts *
#*********************************************************************
 0.0 = ptheavy ! minimum pt for at least one heavy final state
 0.0 = xptj ! minimum pt for at least one jet
 0.0 = xptb ! minimum pt for at least one b
 0.0 = xpta ! minimum pt for at least one photon
 0.0 = xptl ! minimum pt for at least one charged lepton
#*********************************************************************
# Control the pt's of the jets sorted by pt *
#*********************************************************************
 0.0 = ptj1min ! minimum pt for the leading jet in pt
 0.0 = ptj2min ! minimum pt for the second jet in pt
 0.0 = ptj3min ! minimum pt for the third jet in pt
 0.0 = ptj4min ! minimum pt for the fourth jet in pt
 -1.0 = ptj1max ! maximum pt for the leading jet in pt
 -1.0 = ptj2max ! maximum pt for the second jet in pt
 -1.0 = ptj3max ! maximum pt for the third jet in pt
 -1.0 = ptj4max ! maximum pt for the fourth jet in pt
 0 = cutuse ! reject event if fails any (0) / all (1) jet pt cuts
#*********************************************************************
# Control the pt's of leptons sorted by pt *
#*********************************************************************
 0.0 = ptl1min ! minimum pt for the leading lepton in pt
 0.0 = ptl2min ! minimum pt for the second lepton in pt
 0.0 = ptl3min ! minimum pt for the third lepton in pt
 0.0 = ptl4min ! minimum pt for the fourth lepton in pt
 -1.0 = ptl1max ! maximum pt for the leading lepton in pt
 -1.0 = ptl2max ! maximum pt for the second lepton in pt
 -1.0 = ptl3max ! maximum pt for the third lepton in pt
 -1.0 = ptl4max ! maximum pt for the fourth lepton in pt
#*********************************************************************
# Control the Ht(k)=Sum of k leading jets *
#*********************************************************************
 0.0 = htjmin ! minimum jet HT=Sum(jet pt)
 -1.0 = htjmax ! maximum jet HT=Sum(jet pt)
 0.0 = ihtmin !inclusive Ht for all partons (including b)
 -1.0 = ihtmax !inclusive Ht for all partons (including b)
 0.0 = ht2min ! minimum Ht for the two leading jets
 0.0 = ht3min ! minimum Ht for the three leading jets
 0.0 = ht4min ! minimum Ht for the four leading jets
 -1.0 = ht2max ! maximum Ht for the two leading jets
 -1.0 = ht3max ! maximum Ht for the three leading jets
 -1.0 = ht4max ! maximum Ht for the four leading jets
#***********************************************************************
# Photon-isolation cuts, according to hep-ph/9801442 *
# When ptgmin=0, all the other parameters are ignored *
# When ptgmin>0, pta and draj are not going to be used *
#***********************************************************************
 0.0 = ptgmin ! Min photon transverse momentum
 0.4 = R0gamma ! Radius of isolation code
 1.0 = xn ! n parameter of eq.(3.4) in hep-ph/9801442
 1.0 = epsgamma ! epsilon_gamma parameter of eq.(3.4) in hep-ph/9801442
 True = isoEM ! isolate photons from EM energy (photons and leptons)
#*********************************************************************
# WBF cuts *
#*********************************************************************
 0.0 = xetamin ! minimum rapidity for two jets in the WBF case
 0.0 = deltaeta ! minimum rapidity for two jets in the WBF case
#***********************************************************************
# Turn on either the ktdurham or ptlund cut to activate *
# CKKW(L) merging with Pythia8 [arXiv:1410.3012, arXiv:1109.4829] *
#***********************************************************************
 -1.0 = ktdurham
 0.4 = dparameter
 -1.0 = ptlund
 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 21 = pdgs_for_merging_cut ! PDGs for two cuts above
#*********************************************************************
# maximal pdg code for quark to be considered as a light jet *
# (otherwise b cuts are applied) *
#*********************************************************************
 5 = maxjetflavor ! Maximum jet pdg code
#*********************************************************************
#
#*********************************************************************
# Store info for systematics studies *
# WARNING: Do not use for interference type of computation *
#*********************************************************************
   True = use_syst ! Enable systematics studies
#
systematics = systematics_program ! none, systematics [python], SysCalc [depreceted, C++]
['--mur=0.5,1,2', '--muf=0.5,1,2', '--pdf=errorset'] = systematics_arguments ! see: https://cp3.irmp.ucl.ac.be/projects/madgraph/wiki/Systematics#Systematicspythonmodule

Question information

Language:
English Edit question
Status:
Solved
For:
MadGraph5_aMC@NLO Edit question
Assignee:
No assignee Edit question
Solved by:
Yue Xu
Solved:
Last query:
Last reply:

This question was reopened

Revision history for this message
Yue Xu (yuexu) said : 		#1

Dear all,

It seems because MadGraph decay chain and MadSpin can't be used at the same time.
If I change the process to generate p p > z x0 > z z z, I can use the MadSpin.

What is the difference between these two cases? I found the corss-section of this two cases are not consistent.

Best,
Yue

Revision history for this message
Olivier Mattelaer (olivier-mattelaer) said : 		#2

Hi,

The syntax " > X >" means that particles X need to be present as S-channel somewhere in the Feynman diagram.
The syntax " X, X > A B" means that particles X is onshell and decays to A and B.

The first syntax does not assume anything: it is a pure diagram filtering. The issue of this syntax is that you are often breaking gauge invariance and this can lead to unphysical regime (actually quite often).
The second syntax implies that particles X is close to be onshell (by default up to 15 times the width away from the pole mass).
This phase-space cut ensure that you are in a regime where NWA is still valid and avoid such issue with the breaking of gauge invariance.

In your case, I would disfavor the first syntax. I would rather use
generate p p > z z z

Cheers,

Olivier

Revision history for this message
Yue Xu (yuexu) said : 		#3

Hi,

I have compared the result with syntax p p > z x0 > z z z( MadSpin decay z > j j; decay z > l l) and with syntax like p p > z x0, z > j j, x0 > z z > l- l+ j j(all the processes include at least one leptonic decay z).
And added a lepton filter requesting at least two leptons.
The kinematic distributions are not match well. It seems because of the reason you talked above.

I'm wondering if we use the syntax generate p p > z z z, will the X on-shell ?

Cheers,
Yue

Revision history for this message
Yue Xu (yuexu) said : 		#4

I have checked the Feyman diagram of p p > z z z, but there are many additional diagrams comparing to p p > z x0 > z z z. These additional diagrams are not associated production with vector boson and some of them don't have the heavy resonance x0 but others x1 or x2.

Can we keep the z z from x0 when using p p > z z z?

Cheers,
Yue

Revision history for this message
Olivier Mattelaer (olivier-mattelaer) said : 		#5

Hi,

> I have checked the Feyman diagram of p p > z z z, but there are many
> additional diagrams comparing to p p > z x0 > z z z.

That's exactly why I would suggest to use p p > z z z this is to avoid any issue with the potential validity of the diagram removal (and potential symmetry issues if any).
Having additional diagram is the goal of this syntax.
Now they are many syntax available to forbid particles appearing in Feynman diagram
with various options:
see https://indico.ihep.ac.cn/event/7822/contribution/19/material/slides/0.pdf <https://indico.ihep.ac.cn/event/7822/contribution/19/material/slides/0.pdf>
for a tutorial describing the most common options and their implications.
(Then it is up to you to use the one appropriate physically for your process/benchmark)

Cheers,

Olivier

> On 8 Jan 2020, at 06:48, Yue Xu <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> Question #687784 on MadGraph5_aMC@NLO changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/mg5amcnlo/+question/687784
>
> Yue Xu gave more information on the question:
> I have checked the Feyman diagram of p p > z z z, but there are many
> additional diagrams comparing to p p > z x0 > z z z. These additional
> diagrams are not associated production with vector boson and some of
> them don't have the heavy resonance x0 but others x1 or x2.
>
> Can we keep the z z from x0 when using p p > z z z?
>
> Cheers,
> Yue
>
> --
> You received this question notification because you are an answer
> contact for MadGraph5_aMC@NLO.

Revision history for this message
Yue Xu (yuexu) said : 		#6

Hi Olivier,

I just want to keep the process including x0 decay to z z and remove x1/x2 to z z.
So I generated with:
generate p p > z z z $ x0 / x1 x2

But looking at the diagram some diagrams without heavy resonance appear(like diagram 19 in the link below).
The link of part of diagrams: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uEfx-Rypmvm58jtjWp6DVEfYhOR_RtgX/view?usp=sharing

How can I remove it? I didn't find the corresponding options.

Cheers,
Yue

Revision history for this message
Olivier Mattelaer (olivier-mattelaer) said : 		#7

Hi,

> I just want to keep the process including x0 decay to z z and remove x1/x2 to z z.

The two options that you have are:
> generate p p > x0 > z z z
 and
> generate p p > x0 z , x0 > z z

I have already describe the assumptions behind both syntax.
Now diagrams 19 does not bother me at all.
Now it is true that such set of diagram, should be gauge independent
of all the others ones that you are interested in and therefore can be meaningfully be removed.

This being said, your syntax with the single $ removes the onshell contribution of the x0.
And therefore will indicate the importance of the (far) off-shell effects.

Cheers,

Olivier

>
> On 8 Jan 2020, at 11:04, Yue Xu <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> Question #687784 on MadGraph5_aMC@NLO changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/mg5amcnlo/+question/687784
>
> Status: Answered => Open
>
> Yue Xu is still having a problem:
> Hi Olivier,
>
> I just want to keep the process including x0 decay to z z and remove x1/x2 to z z.
> So I generated with:
> generate p p > z z z $ x0 / x1 x2
>
> But looking at the diagram some diagrams without heavy resonance appear(like diagram 19 in the link below).
> The link of part of diagrams: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uEfx-Rypmvm58jtjWp6DVEfYhOR_RtgX/view?usp=sharing
>
> How can I remove it? I didn't find the corresponding options.
>
> Cheers,
> Yue
>
> --
> You received this question notification because you are an answer
> contact for MadGraph5_aMC@NLO.

Revision history for this message
Yue Xu (yuexu) said : 		#8

Hi,

I'm confused.
You suggested to use p p > z z z instead of p p > z x0 > z z z to avoid any issue with the validity of the NWA for the x0 particles.

Now I want to remove the diagrams like diagram 19, so I can only choose to use p p > z x0 > z z z or p p > z x0, x0 > z z.
But consider the MadSpin issue, I can only choose to use p p > z x0 > z z z.

I have checked the x0 mass distribution with p p > z x0 > z z z and with MadGraph decay chain( in slide 4).
The link is in: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yAHFKpBLgkuI_Ttten_ZIakbk2mtkN1K/view?usp=sharing

So in this case, does it reliable to generate events with p p > z x0 > z z z.

Cheers,
Yue

P.S the reason I don't choose to use "generate p p > x0 z , z > all all QCD=99, ( x0 > z z, z > all all QCD=99)" is that we want to use the reweight technique. So we must decay the x0 before MadSpin. Different parameter choice has different x0 width.

Revision history for this message
Olivier Mattelaer (olivier-mattelaer) said : 		#9

Hi,

The main issue is that I do not know what analysis you are trying to do and which part of the phase-space (and which benchmark you are using). Also I do no know the model that you are using.

To my point of view, the safest syntax is certainly to do
generate p p > z z z
Any other syntax need to be justify to my point of view.
(if you are removing some Feynman Diagram, you need to be able to justify why you can remove them). Personally I would stop here but clearly you do not want that set of diagram, which is obviously your right (if you can justify why you do not want those).

Obviously, in order to make sense, you have to keep your final set of Feynman diagram to be gauge invariant (and lorentz invariant).
From what I see from your Feynman diagram
> p p > z x0 > z z z
 is likely to break gauge invariance. And I strongly discourage it.
However I believe that the following syntax should be fine
> p p > x0 > z z z

and might be exactly what you request. (As far as I can see, they are no reason to request to have a Z in s-channel for this process)

> I have checked the x0 mass distribution with p p > z x0 > z z z and with MadGraph decay chain( in slide 4).
> The link is in: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yAHFKpBLgkuI_Ttten_ZIakbk2mtkN1K/view?usp=sharing <https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yAHFKpBLgkuI_Ttten_ZIakbk2mtkN1K/view?usp=sharing>

When I see your first slide, it seems clear that you are not understanding the
"> X >" syntax. This syntax request to have particle X in s-channel somewhere
Therefore "> X X >" syntax is the same as "> X >".

One plot I would like to see is the shat plot, since this is a plot where you can see the difference (I guess) between
> p p > x0 > z z z
 and
> p p > x0 z > z z z

and
> p p > x0 z , x0 > z z

but I would also compare all those plots with p p > z z z
to be sure that everything is under control

Cheers,

Olivier

> On 8 Jan 2020, at 11:43, Yue Xu <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> Question #687784 on MadGraph5_aMC@NLO changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/mg5amcnlo/+question/687784
>
> Status: Answered => Open
>
> Yue Xu is still having a problem:
> Hi,
>
> I'm confused.
> You suggested to use p p > z z z instead of p p > z x0 > z z z to avoid any issue with the validity of the NWA for the x0 particles.
>
> Now I want to remove the diagrams like diagram 19, so I can only choose to use p p > z x0 > z z z or p p > z x0, x0 > z z.
> But consider the MadSpin issue, I can only choose to use p p > z x0 > z z z.
>
> I have checked the x0 mass distribution with p p > z x0 > z z z and with MadGraph decay chain( in slide 4).
> The link is in: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yAHFKpBLgkuI_Ttten_ZIakbk2mtkN1K/view?usp=sharing
>
> So in this case, does it reliable to generate events with p p > z x0 > z
> z z.
>
> Cheers,
> Yue
>
> P.S the reason I don't choose to use "generate p p > x0 z , z > all all
> QCD=99, ( x0 > z z, z > all all QCD=99)" is that we want to use the
> reweight technique. So we must decay the x0 before MadSpin. Different
> parameter choice has different x0 width.
>
> --
> You received this question notification because you are an answer
> contact for MadGraph5_aMC@NLO.

Revision history for this message
Yue Xu (yuexu) said : 		#10

Hi Olivier,

Thanks for the patient explanation!

Now I understand the issue!
I misunderstood the meaning of syntax > X >.
With p p > z x0 > z z z, both z and x0 are requested to be in s-channel. However I just need x0 is in the s-channel.

I'm using the Higgs Characterization model, only studying the coupling between heavy Higgs x0 and vector boson.
I need to check the plot between different syntax.

Cheers,
Yue

Revision history for this message
Yue Xu (yuexu) said : 		#11

Hi Olivier,

As I mentioned above, I'm using reweighting and MadSpin with process: p p > x0 > z z z.

The reweight card is:
launch --rwgt_name=fwM1000fwwM2414
 set FRBLOCK 16 -1.44408
 set FRBLOCK 18 -2.00897
 set FRBLOCK 21 0.262405
 set FRBLOCK 22 0.262405
 set DECAY 5000000 auto

The madspin card is:
decay z > l- l+
launch

I checked the reweighted cross-section and kinematic distribution. The reweighted cross-section is consistent with the cross-section calculated with MadGraph directly.
The truth Z pt and mass distributions of the reweighted are consistent with the one generated with MadGraph directly.
But the lepton pt distributions of reweighted are different with the direct one at pt<200GeV range.

I also tried with other parameter settings. The reweighted cross-section and truth Z mass and pt distributions are consistent with the direct one. But sometimes the lepton pt distributions of reweighted are different with the direct one at pt<200GeV range, sometimes they are consistent.

Could you give us some suggestions in this case?

Cheers,
Yue

Revision history for this message
Olivier Mattelaer (olivier-mattelaer) said : 		#12

Does your width change for the two benchmark?
If yes re-weighting method are expected to have poor efficiency and this might be the reason of such issues.

Cheers,

Olivier

> On 4 Feb 2020, at 10:14, Yue Xu <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> Question #687784 on MadGraph5_aMC@NLO changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/mg5amcnlo/+question/687784
>
> Status: Solved => Open
>
> Yue Xu is still having a problem:
> Hi Olivier,
>
> As I mentioned above, I'm using reweighting and MadSpin with process: p
> p > x0 > z z z.
>
> The reweight card is:
> launch --rwgt_name=fwM1000fwwM2414
> set FRBLOCK 16 -1.44408
> set FRBLOCK 18 -2.00897
> set FRBLOCK 21 0.262405
> set FRBLOCK 22 0.262405
> set DECAY 5000000 auto
>
> The madspin card is:
> decay z > l- l+
> launch
>
> I checked the reweighted cross-section and kinematic distribution. The reweighted cross-section is consistent with the cross-section calculated with MadGraph directly.
> The truth Z pt and mass distributions of the reweighted are consistent with the one generated with MadGraph directly.
> But the lepton pt distributions of reweighted are different with the direct one at pt<200GeV range.
>
> I also tried with other parameter settings. The reweighted cross-section
> and truth Z mass and pt distributions are consistent with the direct
> one. But sometimes the lepton pt distributions of reweighted are
> different with the direct one at pt<200GeV range, sometimes they are
> consistent.
>
> Could you give us some suggestions in this case?
>
> Cheers,
> Yue
>
> --
> You received this question notification because you are an answer
> contact for MadGraph5_aMC@NLO.

Revision history for this message
Yue Xu (yuexu) said : 		#13

Yes, the width is changed.

I wonder if the usage of MadSpin will influence the efficiency. Since the cross-section and truth Z mass and pt distributions after reweighting are matched well with the direct one. Only the lepton pt distributions from MadSpin decay z are not matched well.

Cheers,
Yue

Revision history for this message
Yue Xu (yuexu) said : 		#14

I have a ppt showing the not matching of lepton pt distribution while three vector boson pt distributions are matched well(in slide 6, 8, 10).
Please find it in: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1C5Cxn1M9f3t14wgbYarxmb9PnvCpBSEX/view?usp=sharing

How does this happen? In principle, if the three vector boson pt distributions are matched, the lepton pt distributions should also match.

Thanks,
Yue

Revision history for this message
Olivier Mattelaer (olivier-mattelaer) said : 		#15

In which order are MadSpin/reweighting done?
is it first MadSpin and then re-weighitng or the opposite in your case?

Cheers,

Olivier

Revision history for this message
Yue Xu (yuexu) said : 		#16

Opposite. It's first re-weighting and then MadSpin.
It seems it's the default oder.

Cheers,
Yue

Revision history for this message
Olivier Mattelaer (olivier-mattelaer) said : 		#17

Ok,

Would then suggest to not use MadSpin at all
and check
p p > x0 > z z z , z > e+ e-
and then do only the re-weighting

Cheers,

Olivier

Revision history for this message
Yue Xu (yuexu) said : 		#18

May I ask the reason?

We have tried to use something like "p p > x0 > z z z , z > e+ e-", the MadGraph decay chain. But it takes a very long time to do the re-weighting.
In order to reduce the re-weighting time, we want to just re-weight the bosonic final state e.g. p p > x0 > z z z and then use MadSpin to decay Z.

Cheers,
Yue

Revision history for this message
Olivier Mattelaer (olivier-mattelaer) said : 		#19

MadSpin will use the first theory and will generate the matrix-element according to the full matrix-element (divided by the production one).
All the other weight associated to the original weight (and actually the orginal one as well) will just be re-scaled by the Branching ratio).

So if that ratio actually depends of the BSM scenario, it can induces the bias that you observe.
So this is why I suggest to not use MadSpin to see if this improves the situation since then the re-weighting will be applied on the 2>6 matrix-element

Cheers,

Olivier

> On 17 Feb 2020, at 14:03, Yue Xu <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> Question #687784 on MadGraph5_aMC@NLO changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/mg5amcnlo/+question/687784
>
> Status: Answered => Open
>
> Yue Xu is still having a problem:
> May I ask the reason?
>
> We have tried to use something like "p p > x0 > z z z , z > e+ e-", the MadGraph decay chain. But it takes a very long time to do the re-weighting.
> In order to reduce the re-weighting time, we want to just re-weight the bosonic final state e.g. p p > x0 > z z z and then use MadSpin to decay Z.
>
> Cheers,
> Yue
>
> --
> You received this question notification because you are an answer
> contact for MadGraph5_aMC@NLO.

Revision history for this message
Yue Xu (yuexu) said : 		#20

I understand if we apply re-weight on process p p > x0 > z z z, the re-weighting will only be applied on the 2>3 matrix-element. This may cause a different compared to process p p > x0 > z z z, z>l-l+ (2>6 matrix-element), since the reweight weight according to the matrix element may be different.

But in principle, the ratio applied to other weights by MadSpin is only related to the branching ratio of Z->l-l+.
So this ratio should not be influenced by the BSM scenario.
Right?

Cheers,
Yue

Revision history for this message
Olivier Mattelaer (olivier-mattelaer) said : 		#21

HI,

> But in principle, the ratio applied to other weights by MadSpin is only related to the branching ratio of Z->l-l+.
> So this ratio should not be influenced by the BSM scenario.
> Right?

This would be True if you asked MadSpin to run without spin-correlation and without off-shell effects.
But you certainly have spin-correlation between your 3 Z (since they came from an scalar particle).
And such spin-correlation is likely (I have no clue of your model so this is a pure guess) related to your BSM parameter.

Since you seem to have issue on the lepton distribution but on the Z distribution this sound the best shot to understand the issue. And this is why it is interesting to look if you have the same issue with the 2>6 or not.

Cheers,

Olivier

> On 19 Feb 2020, at 06:12, Yue Xu <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> Question #687784 on MadGraph5_aMC@NLO changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/mg5amcnlo/+question/687784
>
> Status: Answered => Open
>
> Yue Xu is still having a problem:
> I understand if we apply re-weight on process p p > x0 > z z z, the re-
> weighting will only be applied on the 2>3 matrix-element. This may
> cause a different compared to process p p > x0 > z z z, z>l-l+ (2>6
> matrix-element), since the reweight weight according to the matrix
> element may be different.
>
> But in principle, the ratio applied to other weights by MadSpin is only related to the branching ratio of Z->l-l+.
> So this ratio should not be influenced by the BSM scenario.
> Right?
>
> Cheers,
> Yue
>
> --
> You received this question notification because you are an answer
> contact for MadGraph5_aMC@NLO.

Revision history for this message
Yue Xu (yuexu) said : 		#22

Thanks Olivier!
I understand the issue now.

In our process p p > x0 > z z z, two Z bosons are form x0, another Z boson is from the adjoint production with x0.
Mostly the discrepancy in the leptons from heavy Higgs is larger than the one in the leptons from the adjoint Z boson. It's consistent with what you said.

Cheers,
Yue