Update HCAL aging parameters and thresholds

[kpedro88]

1. Updated HCAL scintillator radiation damage parameters based on latest measurements and fits (https://indico.cern.ch/event/721565/contributions/2966213/attachments/1632432/2603148/2018.04.12_Updated_DvsR_fits_and_predictions.pdf)
2. Updated HCAL SiPM radiation damage parameters based on latest measurements and fits (https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/CMSPublic/HcalDPGResultsCMSDPS2017042/dark_current_vs_lumi.png)
3. Simplified HCAL PF threshold adjustments for different eras.
4. Use Run 3 PF thresholds for Phase 2 by default (account for increased depth segmentation in HB).
5. Add separate CaloTower thresholds for Run 3 HB depths 1,2 (similar to Phase 1 HE, updated a while back).
6. Update PF and CaloTower thresholds for different HCAL aging scenarios, now that SiPM noise can increase beyond the previous default threshold of ~0.8 GeV.

The new thresholds were proposed, tested, and validated by @hatakeyamak (thanks!): https://baylor.app.box.com/s/w32ja75krcbxcycyifexu28dwlgrj7wg

We observed that PF gammas get a lot of extra energy introduced by ECAL aging; this will be followed up with the appropriate people.

[cmsbuild]

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

-code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-23638/5285

Code check has found code style and quality issues which could be resolved by applying a patch in https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-23638/5285/git-diff.patch
e.g. curl https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-23638/5285/git-diff.patch | patch -p1

You can run scram build code-checks to apply code checks directly

[cmsbuild]

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-23638/28810/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• Reco comparison results: 4467 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 31
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2902147
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 880
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2901077
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 190
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 30 files compared)
• Checked 128 log files, 14 edm output root files, 31 DQM output files

[kpedro88]

+1

[Martin-Grunewald]

+1

[civanch]

+1

[mariadalfonso]

@slava77
@kpedro88 PR also solve the issue you opened on the refactoring of the PF thresholds
#21894

[perrotta]

This is a factor 10 larger than the previous values: please confirm that it is correct
(How can I get these numbers from what in https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/CMSPublic/HcalDPGResultsCMSDPS2017042/dark_current_vs_lumi.png)

[kpedro88]

Indeed, the prediction has increased by a factor of 10. (This necessitated the re-evaluation of PF thresholds. The previous prediction came from a much older measurement.)

You can get the numbers from the plot by taking the slopes, multiplying by (1-lambda) (lambda is given as crosstalk in the SiPMCharacteristics section further down in this file; 0.17 or 0.196 for the different SiPM types), and dividing by the HE dose value intlumiToNeutrons = cms.double(2.92e7) (which is in fb-1/neutrons). This is indicated in the comment.

[pohsun]

+1

[perrotta]

+1

• HCAL aging parameters and CaloTower and PF thresholds are updated according to the most recent fits of data and improved understanding of Phase2
• Reco implementations have been adapted to allow specific thresholds for the different HCAL depths
• It also refactors PF HCAL rechit and cluster configuration, thus fulfilling the request that was in the github issue refactor PF HCAL rechit and cluster configuration (follow up to #21845) #21894
• Results were validated and blessed by HCAL
• The updated thresholds lead to an increase of the number of CaloTowers, e.g. jenkins tests output for TTbar14TeV2023D19 wf 20434:
  
  and consequently of PF candidates in the same region
  
  
• Higher level physics objects are also affected (Electrons, Photons, Jets, BTag, isolations...) and they must be evaluated by POG/PAG in the release validation
• Modifications are only for 2019 and Phase2 workflows, while there is (by construction) no impact on current year or past data and MC productions

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @davidlange6, @slava77, @smuzaffar, @fabiocos (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[fabiocos]

+1