feat: Demonstrator for MillePede alignment of ACTS Kalman tracks

[goblirsc]

Add a first demonstrator of MillePede alignment, using existing ACTS Kalman tracks.

--- END COMMIT MESSAGE ---

First step towards adding actual life to the MillePede ❤️ ACTS effort!

After making Mille available as a plugin in we use it to write ACTS-Kalman tracks out into binary files that can be fit with the MillePede package.

This path is simple (as we can re-use existing tracks), but computationally highly inefficient - we have to "undo" the track fit to bring the global covariance matrix of the Kalman tracks into the format expected by Millepede.
This should hence be seen as an initial proof of concept demonstrator.
For real-life usage, the GeneralBrokenLines track refit (planned for ACTS-integration in the near future) will likely be a better choice for the fitter component in the alignment. But the final implementation should be sufficiently modular to work with any fitter nonetheless.

In this MR, we add

• (algebraic) machinery to translate the Kalman track alignment states to what Mille expects
• Machinery to loosely emulate how Millepede reads the Mille binaries, allowing to populate ACTS TrackAlignmentStates from Mille binaries
• an AlignedTelescopeDetector for a simple showcase setup
• An example algorithm using the new machinery to write (existing) Kalman tracks out into MillePede fit inputs
• A second example algorithm that will load back the Mille files and run an alignment fit with the ACTS solver. NB: This also fixes the problem of the existing alignment example solver only "seeing" one event at a time.
• python bindings for the above
• A unit test ensuring that Mille writing and reading back into ACTS results in consistent alignment problems
• Steering to run a simple workflow with single muons on a misaligned telescope detector.

The alignment fit itself is performed outside ACTS using the MillePede package. Alternatively, it is possible to read the binaries back and solve using the ACTS tooling.

[goblirsc]

Wow, the CI even checks the PR title?
I failed really early this time! 😭

[github-actions]

📊: Physics performance monitoring for 28e9a4a

Full contents

physmon summary

• ✅ Particles fatras
• ✅ Particles geant4
• ✅ Particles ttbar
• ✅ Vertices ttbar
• ✅ Truth tracking (KF)
• ✅ Truth tracking (GSF)
• ✅ Truth tracking (GX2F)
• ✅ Truth tracking (KF refit)
• ✅ Truth tracking (GSF refit)
• ✅ CKF finding performance | trackfinding | single muon | truth smeared seeding
• ✅ CKF fitting performance | trackfinding | single muon | truth smeared seeding
• ✅ CKF track summary | trackfinding | single muon | truth smeared seeding
• ✅ Seeding trackfinding | single muon | truth estimated seeding
• ✅ CKF finding performance | trackfinding | single muon | truth estimated seeding
• ✅ CKF fitting performance | trackfinding | single muon | truth estimated seeding
• ✅ CKF track summary | trackfinding | single muon | truth estimated seeding
• ✅ Seeding trackfinding | single muon | default seeding
• ✅ CKF finding performance | trackfinding | single muon | default seeding
• ✅ CKF fitting performance | trackfinding | single muon | default seeding
• ✅ CKF track summary | trackfinding | single muon | default seeding
• ✅ Seeding trackfinding | single muon | orthogonal seeding
• ✅ CKF finding performance | trackfinding | single muon | orthogonal seeding
• ✅ CKF fitting performance | trackfinding | single muon | orthogonal seeding
• ✅ CKF track summary | trackfinding | single muon | orthogonal seeding
• ✅ Seeding trackfinding | 4 muon x 50 vertices | default seeding
• ✅ CKF finding performance | trackfinding | 4 muon x 50 vertices | default seeding
• ✅ CKF fitting performance | trackfinding | 4 muon x 50 vertices | default seeding
• ✅ CKF track summary | trackfinding | 4 muon x 50 vertices | default seeding
• ✅ Ambisolver finding performance | trackfinding | 4 muon x 50 vertices | default seeding
• ✅ IVF notime | trackfinding | 4 muon x 50 vertices | default seeding
• ✅ AMVF gauss notime | trackfinding | 4 muon x 50 vertices | default seeding
• ✅ AMVF grid time | trackfinding | 4 muon x 50 vertices | default seeding
• ✅ Seeding trackfinding | ttbar with 200 pileup | default seeding
• ✅ CKF finding performance | trackfinding | ttbar with 200 pileup | default seeding
• ✅ CKF fitting performance | trackfinding | ttbar with 200 pileup | default seeding
• ✅ CKF track summary | trackfinding | ttbar with 200 pileup | default seeding
• ✅ Ambisolver finding performance | trackfinding | ttbar with 200 pileup | default seeding
• ✅ ML Ambisolver | trackfinding | ttbar with 200 pileup | default seeding
• ✅ AMVF gauss notime | trackfinding | ttbar with 200 pileup | default seeding
• ✅ AMVF grid time | trackfinding | ttbar with 200 pileup | default seeding
• 🔵️ Comparison - Truth tracking (GX2F vs KF)

[asalzburger]

Amazing!

[goblirsc]

Pausing updates for now to allow for review (sorry for the big PR - once the first bits were in place the extra features just kept coming by themselves 😇 )

[goblirsc]

Could someone please review this?

[paulgessinger]

I can have a look next week. In the meantime, maybe @pbutti or @knutzk could have a look?

[andiwand]

It is also on my list but I didn't get to it yet. Let me also ping the review channel on MM https://mattermost.web.cern.ch/acts/channels/code-review

[andiwand]

couple of small comments and nitpicks but didn't go through completely yet

one major change I was not sure about yet is the telescope detector modifications. I thought the alignment of our detectors is already in place and general enough to support this. I think @asalzburger knows more about this

[goblirsc]

Hi @andiwand @pbutti, thanks for the review - initial set should be implemented now. I think we just need to decide what we prefer to do with the TelescopeDetector vs AlignableTelescopeDetector and some naming subtleties :)

[andiwand]

Hi @andiwand @pbutti, thanks for the review - initial set should be implemented now. I think we just need to decide what we prefer to do with the TelescopeDetector vs AlignableTelescopeDetector and some naming subtleties :)

thanks @goblirsc ! I think we only need one of them. could you extract these changes into a separate PR which just makes the TelescopeDetector alignable using the code you already have for AlignableTelescopeDetector?

[goblirsc]

Hi @andiwand @pbutti, thanks for the review - initial set should be implemented now. I think we just need to decide what we prefer to do with the TelescopeDetector vs AlignableTelescopeDetector and some naming subtleties :)

thanks @goblirsc ! I think we only need one of them. could you extract these changes into a separate PR which just makes the TelescopeDetector alignable using the code you already have for AlignableTelescopeDetector?

Hi, sure - will prepare a follow up PR which ports the alignment functionality to the base TelescopeDetector and removes the "
"aligned" flavour.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
1 New issue
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
1.2% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[goblirsc]

Hi @andiwand @pbutti, thanks for the review - initial set should be implemented now. I think we just need to decide what we prefer to do with the TelescopeDetector vs AlignableTelescopeDetector and some naming subtleties :)

thanks @goblirsc ! I think we only need one of them. could you extract these changes into a separate PR which just makes the TelescopeDetector alignable using the code you already have for AlignableTelescopeDetector?

Hi, sure - will prepare a follow up PR which ports the alignment functionality to the base TelescopeDetector and removes the " "aligned" flavour.

--> #5369