feat: add recoverable CKF error for surfaces without expected measurements. #4120
Conversation
WalkthroughChanged, the code has been. In the Changes
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Poem
Tip ⚡🧪 Multi-step agentic review comment chat (experimental)
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (2)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (23)
🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
github-actions
bot
added
Component - Core
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (4)
Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilterError.hpp (1)
23-23: Add doc comment for this new enumerator, hmmm.
Helpful to future maintainers it will be, if reason for “NoMeasurementExpected” they know.Core/include/Acts/EventData/TrackStateType.hpp (1)
31-32: Expanding track state flags, done you have.
Add guiding comment forNoExpectedHitFlag, yes? Clarity in docs, it shall bring.Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilter.hpp (2)
477-479: See an extraneous line, I do.
*tsRes;leftover from debugging, remove it you should.
697-702: Consistent naming, preserve clarity we must.
Use the exact enumerator name (“NoExpectedHitFlag”) in this message, wise it would be.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
Core/include/Acts/EventData/TrackStateType.hpp(1 hunks)Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilter.hpp(5 hunks)Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilterError.hpp(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧠 Learnings (1)
Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilter.hpp (2)
Learnt from: goetzgaycken
PR: acts-project/acts#3825
File: Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilter.hpp:933-938
Timestamp: 2024-12-02T14:13:24.820Z
Learning: In `Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilter.hpp`, the overloading of `findTracks` functions is intentional for convenience and not considered code duplication.
Learnt from: goetzgaycken
PR: acts-project/acts#3825
File: Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilter.hpp:460-467
Timestamp: 2024-12-05T10:58:53.433Z
Learning: In the `Acts` project, within `Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilter.hpp`, the cache `result.trackStateCandidates` is expected to be empty before calling `createTrackStates` in the function `filter` of `CombinatorialKalmanFilter`.
🪛 GitHub Actions: Docs
Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilter.hpp
[error] 679-679: Doxygen documentation error: The parameter 'expectMeasurements' of Acts::CombinatorialKalmanFilter::Actor::addNonSourcelinkState is not documented.
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (5)
- GitHub Check: unused_files
- GitHub Check: macos
- GitHub Check: missing_includes
- GitHub Check: linux_ubuntu
- GitHub Check: build_debug
🔇 Additional comments (1)
Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilter.hpp (1)
502-513: Recoverable error path, tested must it be.
A scenario forNoMeasurementExpected, confirm coverage with tests, you should.
Introduce an additional flag for states without associated measurement, and for which no measurement is expected.
goetzgaycken
force-pushed
the
feat_handle_surfaces_without_expected_measurement
branch
from
cfe6241 to
75858bc
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilter.hpp (1)
477-479: Simplify your pointer usage, you could.
The expression(*tsRes).empty()can be replaced bytsRes->empty()for improved readability.- if (tsRes.ok() && !(*tsRes).empty()) { + if (tsRes.ok() && !tsRes->empty()) {
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
Core/include/Acts/EventData/TrackStateType.hpp(1 hunks)Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilter.hpp(5 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- Core/include/Acts/EventData/TrackStateType.hpp
🧰 Additional context used
🧠 Learnings (1)
Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilter.hpp (2)
Learnt from: goetzgaycken
PR: acts-project/acts#3825
File: Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilter.hpp:933-938
Timestamp: 2024-12-02T14:13:24.820Z
Learning: In `Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilter.hpp`, the overloading of `findTracks` functions is intentional for convenience and not considered code duplication.
Learnt from: goetzgaycken
PR: acts-project/acts#3825
File: Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilter.hpp:460-467
Timestamp: 2024-12-05T10:58:53.433Z
Learning: In the `Acts` project, within `Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilter.hpp`, the cache `result.trackStateCandidates` is expected to be empty before calling `createTrackStates` in the function `filter` of `CombinatorialKalmanFilter`.
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (8)
- GitHub Check: unused_files
- GitHub Check: linux_ubuntu_extra (ubuntu2204, 20, clang++)
- GitHub Check: missing_includes
- GitHub Check: linux_ubuntu_extra (ubuntu2204, 20, g++)
- GitHub Check: macos
- GitHub Check: linux_ubuntu
- GitHub Check: docs
- GitHub Check: build_debug
🔇 Additional comments (4)
Core/include/Acts/TrackFinding/CombinatorialKalmanFilter.hpp (4)
502-514: Robust, your error handling for recoverable states is.
No further recommendations needed, appear there are none.
523-525: Nicely integrated, these lines are, with the new parameter.
Adding the non-source link state flow is consistent.
697-703: Helpful, these verbose logs are.
Eases debugging when analyzing “Hole” vs “noMeasurementExpected” states, it does.
722-723: Consistent naming, see I do.
The usage ofNoExpectedHitFlagaligns withexpectMeasurements.
|
Added recoverable CKF error to handle surfaces without expected measurements. The latter may occur if the underlying detector element of a sensitive surface is defect or if a trajectory passes the sensor outside the sensitive region. The CKF will not count such cases as holes. Also introduced a specific state flag to distinguish such states from pure material states.
--- END COMMIT MESSAGE ---
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Refactor