Delete obsolete TTTrack::stubPtConsistency function

[tomalin]

PR description:

Some years ago, In the TTTrack class, which represents L1 tracks, the function stubPtConsistency() was renamed chi2BendRed(). The new name gave a clearer idea what this function did, which is to return a chi2/dof (also known as reduced chi2) that was formed from the stub bend information.
However, at that time a duplicate function with the original name was retained in TTTrack, to avoid breaking anyone's code.

This PR finally finally deletes function stubPtConsistency(), and updates the few classes that had not yet migrated to the new function name.

This has no effect on L1 tracking performance, since it is only a name change,

[cmsbuild]

cms-bot internal usage

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-49565/47091

• There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:
  • File L1Trigger/L1TTrackMatch/test/L1TrackObjectNtupleMaker.cc modified in PR(s): Add Bs -> ϕ ϕ -> 4k analysis in GTT #47348
  • File L1Trigger/TrackFindingTracklet/plugins/L1FPGATrackProducer.cc modified in PR(s): Fix memory leaks in L1 tracking found with Valgrind #49550
  • File L1Trigger/TrackFindingTracklet/test/L1TrackNtupleMaker.cc modified in PR(s): Fix memory leaks in L1 tracking found with Valgrind #49550
  • File L1Trigger/VertexFinder/src/VertexFinder.cc modified in PR(s): [L1T] Peak Finding Algorithm for Vertex Reconstruction (Phase 2) #47020, [L1] [LLVM21] Apply clang-tidy changes #49497

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #49565 was updated.

[nothingface0]

@cmsbuild please test

[cmsbuild]

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

It involves the following packages:

• DQM/SiTrackerPhase2 (dqm)
• DQMOffline/L1Trigger (dqm, l1)
• DataFormats/L1TrackTrigger (l1)
• L1Trigger/L1TTrackMatch (l1)
• L1Trigger/TrackFindingTMTT (l1)
• L1Trigger/TrackFindingTracklet (l1)
• L1Trigger/TrackerTFP (l1)
• L1Trigger/VertexFinder (l1)

@BenjaminRS, @ctarricone, @gabrielmscampos, @nothingface0, @quinnanm, @rseidita can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@Martin-Grunewald, @arossi83, @erikbutz, @missirol, @mmusich, @richa2710, @rociovilar, @rovere, @skinnari, @sroychow, @sviret this is something you requested to watch as well.
@ftenchini, @mandrenguyen, @sextonkennedy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[cmsbuild]

+1

Size: This PR adds an extra 16KB to repository
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-2da15d/49839/summary.html
COMMIT: 5bfb8fa
CMSSW: CMSSW_16_0_X_2025-12-08-1100/el8_amd64_gcc13
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/49565/49839/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

DAS Queries: The DAS query tests failed, see the summary page for details.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

• You potentially removed 1 lines from the logs
• ROOTFileChecks: Some differences in event products or their sizes found
• Reco comparison results: 4 differences found in the comparisons
• Reco comparison had 4 failed jobs
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 53
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 4273241
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 3
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 4273218
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 20
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 52 files compared)
• Checked 227 log files, 198 edm output root files, 53 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[nothingface0]

+dqm

[cmsbuild]

Milestone for this pull request has been moved to CMSSW_16_1_X. Please open a backport if it should also go in to CMSSW_16_0_X.

[BenjaminRS]

I don't believe we need to create a new variable chi2BendRed but instead can just use:

Suggested change

	float chi2BendRed =
	StubPtConsistency::getConsistency(aTrack, theTrackerGeom, tTopo, settings_.bfield(), settings_.nHelixPar());
	aTrack.setChi2BendRed(chi2BendRed);
	aTrack.setChi2BendRed(StubPtConsistency::getConsistency(aTrack, theTrackerGeom, tTopo, settings_.bfield(), settings_.nHelixPar()));

[tomalin]

True, but it's a matter of taste. I found two shorter lines more comprehensible than one long line. I can change it if you like.

[BenjaminRS]

Do we need to have a templated method for the proper way the variable should be accessed?

[tomalin]

Do you mean, should function chi2BendRed() be templated? Why would it be? Which template argument do you want?
P.S. All data members of TTTrack are double, which seems a waste of space to me. Sometime we should replace them by float, but that would break backwards compatibility ...