Added Photon MVA V2 weight files and gzipped all Run 2 weight files

[guitargeek]

Besides adding the Photon MVA V2 weight files here, I gzipped all Run 2 weight files, as for the electrons cms-data/RecoEgamma-ElectronIdentification#9.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @guitargeek (Jonas Rembser) for branch master.

@cmsbuild, @smuzaffar, @gudrutis, @mrodozov can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
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.

external issue cms-sw/cmsdist#4195

[smuzaffar]

assign reconstruction

[cmsbuild]

New categories assigned: reconstruction

@slava77,@perrotta you have been requested to review this Pull request/Issue and eventually sign? Thanks

[slava77]

most of the older file names were photon_general_MVA_
The new additions are EgammaPhoId_ is there a good reason to change the style?

There is 94X in the file names already. Is it really necessary to also have a new directory with Fall17_94X ?

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #7 was updated.

external issue cms-sw/cmsdist#4195

[guitargeek]

I guess there is no good reason to change the style. You want something more consistent, now that we rename everything anyway with .gz? At least I removed the Fall17_94X directory.

[slava77]

why not photon_general as a prefix to match what existed before?
Perhaps I miss the context and the "photon general" referred to the non-GED photons.

Technically, RecoEgamma/PhotonIdentification should be enough to denote the purpose. The rest of the name repeating that it's a photon is perhaps not needed.
I'm open for discussion to converge on something descriptive and less random for every update.

[guitargeek]

They are all for GED photons here, the photon_general should just mean that they pass no specific trigger and they are for general analysis use, and not only for one specific analysis like H -> gg.

Maybe the following naming scheme is fine?

RecoEgamma/PhotonIdentification/data/MVA/2015/25ns_EE_V2.weights.xml.gz

If there are not two different IDs for different bunch spacing, the first prefix in the file name is dropped.

Edit: actually MVA instead of MVAWeightFiles is just fine. There is the word weights in the file suffix.

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #7 was updated.

external issue cms-sw/cmsdist#4195

[guitargeek]

I just realized this scheme so you can check what it looks like. Now these tiny effective area files look kinda out of place, maybe they should better be in cmssw? Then we would at least not get questions anymore where they are :)

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #7 was updated.

external issue cms-sw/cmsdist#4195

[slava77]

I'm not sure that changing Fall2017 to just 2017 is generally clear.
IIUC, these correspond to the campaign name strings, not to the years when the files were derived.
It can become pretty confusing if there are, say, Spring2019 and Fall2019

[slava77]

about the effective areas, most recent ones are in cmssw
https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/tree/master/RecoEgamma/PhotonIdentification/data/Fall17
so, perhaps the PHYS14 are OK then to be (back) to cmssw

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #7 was updated.

external issue cms-sw/cmsdist#4195

[guitargeek]

Ah yes, that's where these seasons come from! Right, let's leave them in the names.

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #7 was updated.

external issue cms-sw/cmsdist#4195

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #7 was updated.

external issue cms-sw/cmsdist#4195

[smuzaffar]

@slava77 , is this ready for integration?

[guitargeek]

There is no rush, I still have to wait for the green light from Egamma to do the corresponding cmssw PR anyway.

[slava77]

+1

I think that it's worth to proceed with a cmsdist PR

[mrodozov]

+externals

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs after it passes the integration tests.