Him > Hi, > > a) why only showing the first line in 'INFO' and the rest in 'DEBUG' ? imho, > the whole set of lines should be in INFO. > The sandboxing, allow very low control on what is printed, so if a line do not > start by INFO, it pass in DEBUG. Ok, then maybe just print these lines all one by one so that they are prefixed by INFO and therefore correctly handled by the sandboxing? Anyway, up to you. > > > b) Debug left at: > > CRITICAL: w_orig, w_new, w_new/w_orig = 0.393281380656 0.393281380656 1.0 > [reweight_interface.py at line 813] > > Sorry, I was studying a weird behavior today and forget to remove that print > statement. > > > c) I tried to run the default PY8 analysis for p p > e+ ve [QCD] with your > kamikaze reweighting 'ON', i.e. > > by setting 'py8an_HwU_pp_lvl.o HwU.o' in the analysis parameter of the > shower card, and it fails with: > > > It runs fine with HW6. Never succeed to run PY8 analysis… so I will keep it > like that. > Paolo told me that the parsing should have be fine…. I confirm that an HW6 run or PYTHIA6PT run goes through fine, so this issue is really a problem of the parsing in the py8 driver/analysis which is not really part of this branch, so it will have to be fixed somewhere else I agree. But I think that it is important that it will; hopefully this will come for free when merging with the improved_scale/pdf branch. > > > d) In the card, I think it would be better to use another example than: > > This is fine like that > > > e) I think it is important that any valid process syntax gets correctly > parsed by the reweighting module. > > The problem is that a lower case is applied… The parser is the one of > madgraph. > Will check why. > But the first fix is to allow such syntax. (why the coupling order should be > case sensitive) I don't see why they shouldn't be case sensitive. Anyway, there should be no need for a lower_case() here no? > > > I guess I am missing some processes, but it would be nice if the error was > more explicit! > > That is fine like that Ok. You didn't reply to the other issues I found when changing the model, processes and directory to reuse. So when doing exact NLO reweighting how are these process definition used? How do you reweight differently the Born and virtual in this case? > > > f) The following syntax instruction in the reweight card is wrong: > > Thanks. fixed > > > > g) Can I ask you a favor? Could you add your fortran wrapper that includes > all relevant MadLoop functions as well as the f2py meta-codes in the > standalone MadLoop output as well? (and make sure there is a target in the > makefile to f2py it). I find it very cool and it would be nice to have it > available in the standalone output (doesn’t cost anything). > > I guess you know the answer. The answer is yes because it's just a simple 'cp command' to add to the standalone output? Great, thanks. > > > h) Related to the point above, the reason why the intialization failed is > because you have substituted check_sa.f !!!! So of course now it has not > ‘main' program statement and when you try to compile it, you get : > > Do not see what you are talking about. We sorted that out on Skype, so it's ok. Cheers > Cheers, > > Olivier > > > > On Mar 3, 2016, at 00:15, Valentin Hirschi