Hcal 25ns constrained Method 2 for pre3

[lihux25]

Update on Nov 18th 13:00PM (Chicago time)
] Customize different methods

1. Default is method 2 -> this should be tested
2. To get method 1 -> --customise RecoLocalCalo/HcalRecProducers/HBHE_custom_25nsMethod.customise_HBHE_Method1
3. To get method 0 -> --customise RecoLocalCalo/HcalRecProducers/HBHE_custom_25nsMethod.customise_HBHE_Method0

Update on Nov 17th 17:30PM (Chicago time)
] Incorporate comments from Stoyan
] Switch from 3 iterations of the fit to 1 iteration by default
] Fix two problems reported from static analyzer

1. Fix the pulse shape used for MC to be number 105
2. If method 2 fails (nan issue) or not used (e.g., tstrig < ts4Min), it falls back now to Method 0
3. Add an option to control number of fit iterations
4. Separate out the hbheNegativeFlagSetter from the puCorrMethod switch. It was switched off when Method 1 was disabled. This hbheNegaviteFlagSetter is controlled by setNegativeFlags_ anyway.
5. Add print out to what method is actually activated

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @lihux25 (Hongxuan Liu) for CMSSW_7_3_X.

Hcal 25ns constrained Method 2 for pre3

It involves the following packages:

RecoLocalCalo/HcalRecAlgos
RecoLocalCalo/HcalRecProducers

@cmsbuild, @nclopezo, @StoyanStoynev, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@argiro this is something you requested to watch as well.
You can sign-off by replying to this message having '+1' in the first line of your reply.
You can reject by replying to this message having '-1' in the first line of your reply.
@nclopezo you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 66f6805
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-6432/920/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-6432/920/summary.html

[slava77]

Hi Phil,
my last comparisons were with respect to what we have in the release, 730pre2 to be specific (the previous iteration of method 2).

[StoyanStoynev]

+1
For b88853a.
I retested the PR (latest commit) on top of CMSSW_7_3_X_2014-11-17-0200. My summary given for a previous commit holds overall but the MET plots Slava shows above is what I see now too (so this is slightly different). I was giving CPU timing (wf 25202) before as 0.783724 s/evt for hbheprereco now it is
0.448030 s/evt.
I have checked that the customization options work and ran on 10 events with the following results for CPU time (the significant digits just mean I am quoting what I see):
Method0: 0.060581 s/evt
Method1: 0.060961 s/evt
Method2 (default): 0.433600 s/evt
It is understood that more reduction in time should be attempted after this PR is merged.
Also (performance) differences observed or hints for differences wrt to the IB (latest pre-release) should be better scrutinized (with higher statistics samples as a first step).

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_7_3_X IBs unless changes (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @nclopezo, @ktf, @smuzaffar

[davidlange6]

merging unless someone suggests not to soon (but I think I have understood that this PR is not yet blessed as sufficient for pre3)

[davidlange6]

+1