Updated flavor parton selection for Pythia8

[ferencek]

This is a follow up to #10751, #11076, and #11501 where the hadron- and parton-based jet flavors were decoupled. This led to the realization that the parton selection for Pythia8 was not inclusive enough and in particular was failing to pick up some of the b and c quarks, resulting in spoiled b-tag performance curves in the b-tag DQM.

In addition, the selection of b and c quarks for MiniAOD was updated by dropping any selection based on the particle status code. The increase in the MiniAOD size resulting from this PR was tested by making MiniAOD from /RelValTTbar_13/CMSSW_7_6_0_pre5-76X_mcRun2_asymptotic_v1-v1/GEN-SIM-RECO and was found to be small (~0.9%).

Update (Oct. 5, 2015): More details in the following presentation https://indico.cern.ch/event/449888/contribution/5/attachments/1164881/1679186/FlavourValidation.pdf shown in the b-tag meeting on Oct. 5

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @ferencek (Dinko Ferencek) for CMSSW_7_6_X.

Updated flavor parton selection for Pythia8

It involves the following packages:

PhysicsTools/JetMCAlgos
PhysicsTools/PatAlgos

@cmsbuild, @vadler, @monttj can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@TaiSakuma, @imarches, @ahinzmann, @acaudron, @mmarionncern, @rappoccio, @jdolen, @nhanvtran, @schoef, @ferencek, @gpetruc, @mariadalfonso, @pvmulder 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.

[ferencek]

@monttj, could you please sign this PR. Thanks

[ferencek]

@monttj, @davidlange6 ping

[arizzi]

@davidlange6 why this was not integrated in 76X? did you already cut 760patch1 ?

[davidlange6]

On Nov 10, 2015, at 9:43 AM, arizzi [email protected] wrote:

@davidlange6 why this was not integrated in 76X? did you already cut 760patch1 ?

lack of a AT group and that I had missed it - it would now be part of a patch1 (waiting on a GT)

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[arizzi]

ok great