Raise ECAL thresholds for beam splashes

[stahlleiton]

PR description:

This PR raises the ECAL thresholds for beam splashes as suggested in #37362 (comment) , in an attempt to solve the issue reported in #37362 .

PR validation:

Tested with workflow 138.3

If this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR. If this PR will be backported please specify to which release cycle the backport is meant for:

[cmsbuild]

cms-bot internal usage

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-48663/45679

• There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:
  • File Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/relval_steps.py modified in PR(s): Restructure and comment the tau embedding method #48408, Fixed Number of Events Data Wfs for Testing #48490, Adapt HGCal rechit producer for HGCal testbeam data #48606, Add 2025 HI relval workflows #48634, Add access to dEdx error #48635

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @stahlleiton for master.

It involves the following packages:

• Configuration/ProcessModifiers (operations)
• Configuration/PyReleaseValidation (pdmv, upgrade)
• RecoParticleFlow/PFClusterProducer (reconstruction)

@AdrianoDee, @Moanwar, @antoniovilela, @cmsbuild, @davidlange6, @DickyChant, @fabiocos, @jfernan2, @mandrenguyen, @miquork, @rappoccio, @srimanob, @subirsarkar can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@Martin-Grunewald, @ReyerBand, @argiro, @fabiocos, @felicepantaleo, @hatakeyamak, @lgray, @makortel, @missirol, @mmarionncern, @rchatter, @rovere, @sameasy, @seemasharmafnal, @slomeo, @thomreis, @wang0jin this is something you requested to watch as well.
@antoniovilela, @mandrenguyen, @rappoccio, @sextonkennedy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[mmusich]

is this meant to be picked up by Tier0 during splashes?
If so, how do you envisage it, lacking an appropriate scenario?

[stahlleiton]

That is a good question. I made this PR in an attempt to address the issue reported on relval 138.3 . However I am not sure what would be the best strategy regarding its use in T0.

[iarspider]

please test workflow 138.3 for CMSSW_15_1_ASAN_X

[cmsbuild]

-1

Failed Tests: RelVals
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-0b2968/47727/summary.html
COMMIT: d154b21
CMSSW: CMSSW_15_1_ASAN_X_2025-08-13-2300/el8_amd64_gcc12
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/48663/47727/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

RelVals

• 145.301145.301_RunDisplacedJet2024E/step3_RunDisplacedJet2024E.log

[stahlleiton]

Not sure if the error in the tests are related to this PR

[makortel]

Not sure if the error in the tests are related to this PR

No, it occurs also in the IBs (reported in #47170)

[makortel]

@cmsbuild, please test

Let's run standard tests anyway

[cmsbuild]

+1

Size: This PR adds an extra 16KB to repository
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-0b2968/47729/summary.html
COMMIT: d154b21
CMSSW: CMSSW_15_1_X_2025-08-13-2300/el8_amd64_gcc12
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/48663/47729/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

• You potentially removed 1 lines from the logs
• Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 50
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 4076152
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 53
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 4076079
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 20
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 49 files compared)
• Checked 215 log files, 184 edm output root files, 50 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[jfernan2]

+1

[Moanwar]

+Upgrade

[stahlleiton]

@cms-sw/pdmv-l2 Could you review and sign, please?

[AdrianoDee]

+pdmv

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @ftenchini, @mandrenguyen, @sextonkennedy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[mandrenguyen]

+1