Add PFCluster Isolation to miniAOD electrons and photons

[matteosan1]

As the title says this PR add to floats to electron and photon to store PFCluster Isolation as computed at the HLT.
It contains:

• Factorized isolation computation algorithm so that it can be run by the HLT and offline producers (RecoEgamma/EgammaIsolationAlgos). I have checked that HLT results stays the same.
• Modified Electron.h and Photon.h DF to add the two numbers. (DataFormats/PatCandidates)
• Updated PAT and MiniAOD configurations to store the value in the object. (PhysicsTools/PatAlgos)

The idea is to compute at RECO level the valuemap with the isolation values and propagate it to the miniAOD.
Right now the filling is not activated since we are missing the ValueMap into RECO relvals so it wouldn't pass the standard tests. I have privately checked the filling is ok.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @matteosan1 (Matteo Sani) for CMSSW_7_4_X.

Add PFCluster Isolation to miniAOD electrons and photons

It involves the following packages:

DataFormats/PatCandidates
PhysicsTools/PatAlgos
RecoEgamma/Configuration
RecoEgamma/EgammaHLTProducers
RecoEgamma/EgammaIsolationAlgos
RecoEgamma/EgammaPhotonProducers

@perrotta, @cmsbuild, @nclopezo, @cvuosalo, @fwyzard, @monttj, @Martin-Grunewald, @slava77, @vadler can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@rappoccio, @Sam-Harper, @imarches, @ahinzmann, @acaudron, @mmarionncern, @lgray, @jdolen, @nhanvtran, @schoef, @ferencek, @mariadalfonso, @pvmulder, @TaiSakuma 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.
If you are a L2 or a release manager you can ask for tests by saying 'please test' in the first line of a comment.
@Degano you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[gpetruc]

Shouldn't you have added a ClassVersion 30 instead of modifying the 28?

[matteosan1]

I think it was 27 (but version 28 was listed below anyway) and it told
me to add 29.
I don't know why it changed the checksum for 28.

On 12.03.2015 13:22, Giovanni Petrucciani wrote:

In DataFormats/PatCandidates/src/classes_def_objects.xml
#8221 (comment):

@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@

- -

Shouldn't you have added a |ClassVersion| 30 instead of modifying the 28?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/pull/8221/files#r26296917.

Matteo Sani
University of California, San Diego
+41227671577

[Dr15Jones]

Another pull request could have updated the same file

[Martin-Grunewald]

Needs to be fixed as it does not compile:

error: class 'pat::Electron' has a different checksum for ClassVersion 29. Increment ClassVersion to 30 and assign it to checksum 3508125821
Suggestion: You can run 'scram build updateclassversion' to generate src/DataFormats/PatCandidates/src/classes_def_objects.xml.generated with updated ClassVersion

[Martin-Grunewald]

Need a PR for 75X as well?

[Martin-Grunewald]

+1

[matteosan1]

Yes, I am going to do it today.

On 13.03.2015 12:04, Martin Grunewald wrote:

Need a PR for 75X as well?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#8221 (comment).

Matteo Sani
University of California, San Diego
+41227671577

[slava77]

-1
replaced by #8501