PUID UL18 backport to 11_2_X

[singh-ramanpreet]

PR description:

• This PR is a backport to 11_2_X release.
• The original PR Pileup Id training for UL18 #32418 is already merged to the master branch.

PR validation:

• passes basic tests
• need latest version of https://github.com/cms-data/RecoJets-JetProducers (V05-13-00) or for testing purposes, the PR can be used UL18 PU ID training weights AK4CHS cms-data/RecoJets-JetProducers#12

Re-miniAOD info

_chsalgos_106X_UL17 is already the default.

From the discussion in 106X backport PR #32872, I have added below line, such that _chsalgos_106X_UL18 can be used with run2_miniAOD_devel. Please comment if that's not the case.

+ (run2_miniAOD_devel & (~run2_jme_2016) & (~run2_jme_2017)).toModify(pileupJetId, algos = _chsalgos_106X_UL18)

FYI: @alefisico @camclean @marinakolosova @mariadalfonso

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @singh-ramanpreet (Ramanpreet Singh) for CMSSW_11_2_X.

It involves the following packages:

RecoJets/JetProducers

@perrotta, @jpata, @cmsbuild, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@rappoccio, @jdolen, @yslai, @jdamgov, @ahinzmann, @nhanvtran, @gkasieczka, @clelange, @schoef, @mariadalfonso, @seemasharmafnal this is something you requested to watch as well.
@silviodonato, @dpiparo, @qliphy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

• Backported from Pileup Id training for UL18 #32418

[mariadalfonso]

@singh-ramanpreet

in 11_2 we do not have a miniAOD production for pp ongoing.
so I expect that the 11_2 backport is identical to the 11_3
(we do now have one for Heavy Ion that use a different modifier)

@slava77 can suggest how to proceed

[slava77]

test parameters:

• pull_request = backport RecoJets-JetProducers cmsdist#6668

[slava77]

@singh-ramanpreet

in 11_2 we do not have a miniAOD production for pp ongoing.
so I expect that the 11_2 backport is identical to the 11_3
(we do now have one for Heavy Ion that use a different modifier)

@slava77 can suggest how to proceed

this the master PR affects miniAOD made in production reco workflows; as I recall some of the Run3 requests are being prepared already.
So, changing the defaults will need some more justification.

I think that we can update the UL-modifier-based workflows in the same way as done in 11_3_X without falling back to the _devel modifier.

@qliphy @silviodonato
do you think it's OK to change behavior of the UL remini workflows in 11_2_X?

[slava77]

this PR affects miniAOD made in production reco workflows

I meant the 11_3/master PR does it

[slava77]

@cmsbuild please test

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-c451e0/13024/summary.html
COMMIT: 99442f1
CMSSW: CMSSW_11_2_X_2021-02-22-1100/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/32954/13024/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• Reco comparison results: 8 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 36
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2528845
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 17
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2528806
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 35 files compared)
• Checked 151 log files, 37 edm output root files, 36 DQM output files

[slava77]

I think that we can update the UL-modifier-based workflows in the same way as done in 11_3_X without falling back to the _devel modifier.

@singh-ramanpreet
@camclean @alefisico @lathomas
are you somewhat motivated to have the UL reminiAOD workflows using the new PU ID in 11_2_X?
(If not, we could just move on with this limited backport using run2_miniAOD_devel)
Please clarify.

[lathomas]

@slava77 I don't think so.

[silviodonato]

do you think it's OK to change behavior of the UL remini workflows in 11_2_X?

@slava77 no problem from my side

[perrotta]

backport of #32418

[slava77]

+1

for #32954 99442f1

• this is a partial backport from Pileup Id training for UL18 #32418 , staying in the constraints of the no-change policy/requirement for the production re-miniAOD setup
  • the PR is more of a forward-port of the 10_6_X PUID UL18 backport #32872 than a backport of Pileup Id training for UL18 #32418
  • cleanup of old configs is not backported
  • more appropriate/improved 94X/80X/UL modifications are not applied to keep changes minimal
  • the new UL18 PU ID is made available via run2_miniAOD_devel, which can be added on top of the production miniAOD configuration for analysis or private tests
• tests pass and comparisons with the baseline show no (relevant) difference as expected

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_11_2_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_11_3_X is complete. This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @silviodonato, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[slava77]

@slava77 I don't think so.

Thanks for clarifying.
I've signed the PR.
I guess we can (re)consider having a UL setup in full after the 2016 variant is available as well.

[qliphy]

+1