Update new Phase2C11xx eras by adding the etlV4 modifier

[fabiocos]

PR description:

In the recent addition of new upgrade geometry scenarios and Eras based on MTD version I13 , following the example of D73, the addition of https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/master/Configuration/Eras/python/Modifier_phase2_etlV4_cff.py has been overlooked. This causes a significant drop in efficiency of ETL reconstructed hits for instance in scenario D76, due incorrect digitization, as mentioned in #33130 .

This PR fixes the issue by defining new Eras with the proper addition of the requested modifier, and updating the corresponding test workflows accordingly.

PR validation:

Test wf. 34634.0 now shows back a reasonable hit efficiency in ETL on 10 TTbar events.

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33139/21500

• This PR adds an extra 28KB to repository

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

  • File Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/upgradeWorkflowComponents.py modified in PR(s): Patatrack integration - Pixel workflows (12/N) #31854, Squash all Patatrack developments on top of CMSSW_11_3_0_pre5 #27983
  • File Configuration/StandardSequences/python/Eras.py modified in PR(s): Access Conditions DB for HCAL Pulse Filtering Weights #32717

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @fabiocos (Fabio Cossutti) for master.

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/Eras
Configuration/PyReleaseValidation
Configuration/StandardSequences

@jordan-martins, @chayanit, @wajidalikhan, @srimanob, @kpedro88, @cmsbuild, @silviodonato, @franzoni, @qliphy, @fabiocos, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @felicepantaleo, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @rovere, @VinInn, @Martin-Grunewald, @lecriste, @mtosi, @dgulhan, @slomeo 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

[fabiocos]

please test

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-96315f/13425/summary.html
COMMIT: 63d0804
CMSSW: CMSSW_11_3_X_2021-03-09-2300/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/33139/13425/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: 5981 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 38
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2849195
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 60212
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 58
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2788903
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.004 KiB( 37 files compared)
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 312.0 ): 0.004 KiB MessageLogger/Warnings
• Checked 160 log files, 37 edm output root files, 38 DQM output files

[srimanob]

Thanks @fabiocos
By the way, should Phase2C11T22M9 and Phase2C11T23M9 be cleaned up as we don't need them any more (i.e. no plan for recent sub-detectors with old MTD).

[fabiocos]

@srimanob I'll check and remove them. @silviodonato @qliphy not sure why there are so many changes in the tests, of course D76 will be affected in ETL and whatever depends on it, but I do not understand why Hcal digitization should be affected for instance

[fabiocos]

@silviodonato @qliphy ok, the random number sequence for digitization is now common to most subdetectors, and this may explain what is observed (muons are separate, and indeed muon digitization does not see significant changes).

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33139/21513

• This PR adds an extra 28KB to repository

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

  • File Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/upgradeWorkflowComponents.py modified in PR(s): Patatrack integration - Pixel workflows (12/N) #31854, Squash all Patatrack developments on top of CMSSW_11_3_0_pre5 #27983
  • File Configuration/StandardSequences/python/Eras.py modified in PR(s): Access Conditions DB for HCAL Pulse Filtering Weights #32717

[fabiocos]

@smuzaffar thanks for understanding the issue, I do not recall it in the past, and the number of failures here does not seem particularly big compared to other situations. I'll wait for the end of the new comparison

[smuzaffar]

@fabiocos , histogram are available now

[srimanob]

Hi @fabiocos
Would you mind posting the plot from comparison show that this PR gives you as expected? It is just to complete the documentation of the PR. Thanks.

[fabiocos]

@srimanob from a quick inspection you may see that the BTL plots are essentially unchanged (but for statistical fluctuations), as expected. As far as ETL is concerned, the charge deposit is significantly different:

as expected from the activation of https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/master/SimFastTiming/FastTimingCommon/python/mtdDigitizer_cfi.py#L88

Further more, the hits associated to tracks (negative values for ETL, see https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/master/Validation/MtdValidation/plugins/MtdGlobalRecoValidation.cc#L209 ) are now higher than before:

@gsorrentino18 please confirm that this is the expected behaviour, based on your comparison with the old D73 plots

[srimanob]

+Upgrade

[gsorrentino18]

@fabiocos yes, I confirm this is the same behavior I observed when I made comparisons with D73 scenario

[fabiocos]

type bug

[srimanob]

Urgent

Should be included in pre5. FYI @qliphy @silviodonato
@cms-sw/pdmv-l2 Could you please comment and sign if it is OK.

[chayanit]

+1

[qliphy]

+operations

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

[qliphy]

+1