Add customized NanoAOD content for JetMET JERC studies

[nurfikri89]

For customized NanoAOD production for JetMET jet energy calibration. The script adds a few additional variables for AK4PFCHS and AK8PFPUPPI jets which are not available in the latest nanoAOD production (v5). It saves additional (reco & gen) jet collections that are available in MiniAODs and also jet collections that are not available in MiniAODs by building the jet collections first. These collections are the required input for jet energy calibration and the customized NanoAOD production is first step in the workflow to automate the jet energy calibration. This script needs to be backported to 10_6_X, once merged, for the ultra legacy campaigns.

A few questions:
The addGenJetCollection and addRecoJetCollection functions mix NanoAOD content and jet collection building. Should they be split into two parts, and if so, where should the non-NanoAOD related one be put?

[cmsbuild]

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-27826/11550

• This PR adds an extra 16KB to repository

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @nurfikri89 (Nurfikri Norjoharuddeen) for master.

It involves the following packages:

PhysicsTools/NanoAOD

@cmsbuild, @santocch, @fgolf, @peruzzim can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@gpetruc this is something you requested to watch as well.
@davidlange6, @slava77, @fabiocos you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[clelange]

FYI @ahinzmann @camclean @lathomas (sorry, don't know all usernames)

[peruzzim]

Yes, as discussed also with @clelange, a very large part of the added file contains generic setup functions to build additional jet collections. They should go in a JME software area, leaving only the parts that customize NanoAOD configuration in the added file.

The form of a function customizing the process seems adequate to me, we can discuss whether to also add a modifier to allow for activating it in a more robust way from the cmsDriver command line.

[clelange]

@alefisico We were wondering whether with the help of JetToolBox we can significantly shorten the config, e.g. by making use of what is the equivalent of addGenJetCollection and addRecoJetCollection in JetToolBox.

[alefisico]

@clelange I think so, but I would need to test it first.
However, as far as I understand this tread, the idea is to have a customized nanoAOD for jetMET "inside CMSSW", while the jetToolbox is an outside package that it would need to be cloned first. Wouldn't that be a problem?

[clelange]

@alefisico Yes, that would mean that JetToolBox would need to be integrated into CMSSW. I guess this won't happen on the timescale that we intend for this PR (and we should discuss somewhere else whether this is what we would want).
@ahinzmann @lathomas @rappoccio @peruzzim To which package would you suggest to move the addGenJetCollection and addRecoJetCollection functions? Is there maybe already some similar functionality available somewhere else?

[rappoccio]

In the beginning we had the jet toolbox in CMSSW but it became a nightmare to put in new features. We needed more flexibility. I agree that moving some functions into CMSSW would be better. This should probably go into PhysicsTools/PatAlgos somewhere.

[clelange]

@nurfikri89 I think it makes sense to move those two functions to PhysicsTools/PatAlgos/python, e.g. a new file that could be called jetCollectionTools.py. Do you think you can take care of that in the next few days?

[nurfikri89]

@clelange Yes, I can do it.

[cmsbuild]

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-27826/11630

• This PR adds an extra 20KB to repository

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: ae726b7
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-5f68db/2607/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison job queued.

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-5f68db/2607/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 34
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2958092
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2957750
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 341
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 33 files compared)
• Checked 145 log files, 15 edm output root files, 34 DQM output files

[fabiocos]

+1

[fabiocos]

merge

[santocch]

+1

[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 be automatically merged.

[ahinzmann]

@nurfikri89 Can you backport this to 10_6_X?
Then we can ask PdmV to run a test RelVal production for UL2017.

[nurfikri89]

@ahinzmann Sure. Will do this now.

[nurfikri89]

@ahinzmann @clelange Backport to 10_6_X is #28052.