[PWGJE] Jet substructure SoftDrop

[louisemillot]

Add detailed jet substructure analysis for data, MCD, and MCP

• Implemented soft-drop jet reclustering with constituent handling
• Filled matched histograms for geometry- and event-wise matched jets
• Added event selection and centrality cuts for collisions in data and MC
• Handled weighted MC events and event-wise constituent-subtracted jets
• Updated histograms for leading/subleading prongs, zg, rg, and thetag observables
• Added QA histograms for collisions and pTHat checks

[vkucera]

What do you mean by "Required for correct DPL workflow"?

[louisemillot]

I had initially tried without explicitly setting the TaskName, but in that case the workflow was not starting correctly in my DPL test setup. Forcing the TaskName made the device appear and run as expected. That’s why I added the override and the linter disable. I also followed the documentation, which suggested suppressing the linter in this case

[vkucera]

Your task name JetSubstructureSoftDrop should generate a device name jet-substructure-soft-drop. Did you observe anything else?

[louisemillot]

When I remove the explicit TaskName and rely only on adaptAnalysisTask<JetSubstructureSoftDrop>(cfgc), the device is built but in my DPL test workflow it does not run correctly and no histograms are produced.
With the explicit TaskName{"jet-substructure-softdrop"}, the device appears in the workflow graph and the histograms are filled as expected.
That’s why I kept the explicit TaskName and temporarily disabled the linter rule.

[vkucera]

That means that you have wrong names in your test workflow. You need to fix your test, not change the device name.
Which workflow graph are you talking about?

[louisemillot]

Im using this workflow o2-analysis-je-jet-substructure-softdrop when removing the TaskName

[louisemillot]

I meant the O2Framework debug GUI workflow graph. I was using it to check whether the device appears and runs, but I’ve currently disabled it and relied on the log output instead.