Update two variables of electron MVA to match the training definition (75X)

[lgray]

Backport of #11260.

[lgray]

@cmsbuild please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @lgray (Lindsey Gray) for CMSSW_7_5_X.

Update two variables of electron MVA to match the training definition (75X)

It involves the following packages:

RecoEgamma/ElectronIdentification

@cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@Sam-Harper 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.

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: e5db73a
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-11261/8100/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-11261/8100/summary.html

[slava77]

+1

for #11261 e5db73a

• changes in the code look visually ok. This affects only IDs saved in miniAOD objects (not a part of regular DQM plots). The variable change should give a fairly similar behavior (tracker hits -> layers; electron p to electron p at vertex)
• jenkins tests pass and comparisons with baseline show no differences.
• I checked locally that this still runs on AOD as input (using ZEE )

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_7_5_X IBs once checked with relvals in the development release cycle of CMSSW (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[davidlange6]

+1