Update phase-2 Inner Tracker Templates and GenError conditions

[mmusich]

PR description:

In the validation for Phase-2 of CMSSW_11_1_0_pre1, it was noticed that w.r.t. the CMSSW_11_0_0_pre13 there had been a degradation of the tracking fake rate by roughly 7%, (see validation report at valDB ), seemingly after the switching on of the CPE template reconstruction for the phase-2 tracker (in PR #28448).
The problem has persisted in all subsequent validation cycles, making the tracking performance for phase-2 sub-optimal since CMSSW_11_1_0_pre1.
The problem has been traced back by @OzAmram, @cmantill et al. to several small inconsistencies in the payloads firstly proposed in the original PR (see report at Phase-2 tracker simulation meeting during Tracker Week ):

• Incomplete spanning of the local x angle space in FPIX -> not enough angles were generated in first round.
• Different dimension of sensors: switch to 25x100.115 µm² (taking into account the fact that big pixels are not simulated in the phase-2 IT sensors) instead of 25x100 µm².
• A further issue was found in the GenErrors, due to a combination of assuming readout noise as for phase1 (but is currently turned off for phase2), and a minimum error allowed by the templates and against which the old estimate was bumping for some of the angle space.

PR validation:

@cmantill and @OzAmram validated the new payloads using the Multi-Track Validator, (PU200 TTbar14 TeV sample). Validation results are available here, showing substantially consistency with the CMSSW_11_0_0_pre13 results.
Further technical validation has been run locally with this branch by using:

runTheMatrix.py --what upgrade -l 20007.0,20407.0,20807.0,21607.0,22007.0,22807.0,22834.0

if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:

This PR is not a backport.
cc:
@tsusa @tvami @mtosi @JanFSchulte @jalimena @emiglior @skinnari

[cmsbuild]

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-29168/14136

• This PR adds an extra 12KB to repository

• There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:

  • File Configuration/AlCa/python/autoCondPhase2.py modified in PR(s): Inclusion of Pixel 3D technology in the innermost layers of Phase 2 Inner Tracker #29018

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @mmusich (Marco Musich) for master.

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/AlCa

@christopheralanwest, @tocheng, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @tlampen, @pohsun can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @Martin-Grunewald, @mmusich, @tocheng this is something you requested to watch as well.
@davidlange6, @silviodonato, @fabiocos you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[christopheralanwest]

test parameters
workflow = 20007.0,20407.0,20807.0,21607.0,22007.0,22807.0,22834.0

[christopheralanwest]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
Test Parameters:

• MATRIX_EXTRAS = 20007.0,20407.0,20807.0,21607.0,22007.0,22807.0,22834.0
  https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-run-pr-tests/5113/console Started: 2020/03/10 18:56

[cmsbuild]

-1

Tested at: b7cfda1

CMSSW: CMSSW_11_1_X_2020-03-10-1100
SCRAM_ARCH: slc7_amd64_gcc820
You can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-5e53e2/5113/summary.html

I found follow errors while testing this PR

Failed tests: RelVals

• RelVals:

[cmsbuild]

Comparison not run due to runTheMatrix errors (RelVals and Igprof tests were also skipped)

[mmusich]

@christopheralanwest

workflow = 20007.0,20407.0,20807.0,21607.0,22007.0,22807.0,22834.0

all these workflows are unknown to the regular matrix, it's expected they are not possible to test.

[christopheralanwest]

test parameters
-workflow

[christopheralanwest]

please test
@mmusich Thanks for the reminder.

[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, @silviodonato, @fabiocos (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[silviodonato]

This PR is in conflict with #29018. I would prefer to merge #29018 first because is bigger and almost ready to be merged.

@mmusich could you prepare also a "bugfix" tag also for the future T19 of #29018 ( https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/pull/29018/files#diff-180f1a0e560edebbf0a963eb643f79e6L11 ) ?

[mmusich]

@silviodonato

This PR is in conflict with #29018. I would prefer to merge #29018 first because is bigger and almost ready to be merged.

Sure. I will rebase this once the other is merged.

could you prepare also a "bugfix" tag also for the future T19 of #29018

There is no need for that as for T19 we don't run template reco on purpose.

[silviodonato]

Thanks @mmusich. #29018 has been merged

[cmsbuild]

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

[mmusich]

@silviodonato rebase (to HEAD) is done.

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-29168/14205

• This PR adds an extra 12KB to repository

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #29168 was updated. @christopheralanwest, @tocheng, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @tlampen, @pohsun can you please check and sign again.

[silviodonato]

merge
Thanks @mmusich