HGC Linking Incrementals

[lgray]

Remove linking in same layer, baseline for work towards optimizing clustering.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @lgray (Lindsey Gray) for CMSSW_6_2_X_SLHC.

HGC Linking Incrementals

It involves the following packages:

RecoParticleFlow/PFClusterProducer
RecoParticleFlow/PFProducer

@cmsbuild, @nclopezo, @StoyanStoynev, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@mmarionncern, @bachtis 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.
@fratnikov, @mark-grimes you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[lgray]

@vandreev11 @pfs

[vandreev11]

@lgray Presumably the cell size and layer thickness in PFClusterProducer/python/subdetector should be those from the SIM geometry, but they are not. For the V4 they are documented in https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/CMS/PFForwardCalorimeterStudies/HGCALgeometry-v4-2.pdf while for V5 in https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/CMS/PFForwardCalorimeterStudies/HGCALgeometry-v5-4.pdf

[lgray]

@vandreev11 Those names are just copies of the variable names, which are actually in the end somewhat meaningless. They do not actually mean cellsize/layerThickness, it's really more defining some radii.

Plan to fix this or make it automatic.

[mark-grimes]

merge

[lgray]

@mark-grimes There are a few more patches cooking, so there will be a follow up to this. We are approaching reasonableness, though!

[mark-grimes]

@lgray - Yes, @vandreev11 mentioned that further changes were required. There won't be a release until either HGCal or Shashlik have something worth releasing. Preferably both.

[lgray]

@mark-grimes Very good to hear. Thanks!