Skip to content

Add edm4eic::Jet#118

Merged
veprbl merged 12 commits intomainfrom
add-jet-type
Mar 25, 2026
Merged

Add edm4eic::Jet#118
veprbl merged 12 commits intomainfrom
add-jet-type

Conversation

@ruse-traveler
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Briefly, what does this PR introduce?

Following the discussion in #88 , this PR introduces edm4eic::Jet. This type, inspired by the fastjet::PseudoJet, aims to represent jets in our data model in a more adequate way than edm4eic::ReconstructedParticle.

Note these 3 design choices:

  • Only edm4eic::ReconstructedParticle are allowed as constituents, which places jet reconstruction in the final stages of reconstruction,
  • No substructure quantities are represented in the type, which defers them to analyses,
  • And the one-to-many relation jets allows for either the indication of/connection to sub-jets, seed jets (which may be deployed in background-subtraction algorithms), or background jets (e.g. off-axis cones).

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

Please check if this PR fulfills the following:

  • Tests for the changes have been added
  • Documentation has been added / updated
  • Changes have been communicated to collaborators

Does this PR introduce breaking changes? What changes might users need to make to their code?

No.

Does this PR change default behavior?

No.

@ruse-traveler ruse-traveler requested a review from a team as a code owner July 9, 2025 19:14
@ruse-traveler
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Hi all, following up on the 02.10.2026 Key4hep Discussion, I just pushed a change to remove the one-to-many relation to other edm4eic::Jets. After some thought, I definitely agree with the suggestion! If need be, we can always use links to connect one jet to another!

As for generalizing to edm4hep, I think we need some more time to mull over the best approach. How would you feel about the following strategy, @tmadlener ?

  1. If no more feedback, we merge the type as-is into EDM4eic,
  2. We use the type in the EIC stack for a bit to get a better feel for potential use cases,
  3. And then we start working out what a more general approach would be based on that data.

@tmadlener
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Apologies for the delayed response. The strategy sounds perfectly fine for me (at least from the EDM4hep side). I guess we can also start an upstream PR from the current state and keep / start discussing there.

@ruse-traveler
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Apologies for the delayed response. The strategy sounds perfectly fine for me (at least from the EDM4hep side). I guess we can also start an upstream PR from the current state and keep / start discussing there.

Gotcha! Sounds like a plan!

@veprbl veprbl merged commit 97cb2d9 into main Mar 25, 2026
8 checks passed
@veprbl veprbl deleted the add-jet-type branch March 25, 2026 13:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants