Draft: Implement dummy radiation damage template correction for ITK/Pixel
Summary
This MR adds a dummy implementation of the pixel radiation damage correction aimed for ITk. The idea is that a correction to the lorentz angle based on the depth of the initial deposited charge is applied and then the total charge is corrected based on the intiakl deposited charge (originating frin the truth track that deposited the largest energy). This is done by reading pre-calculated (dummy for now) histograms that contain the LA values or charge corrections as a function of initial energy deposition depth.
The information about the initial and end position of the charges is propaged to the "charged diodes". Altough for now only the depth position (Z) is being used, also eta and phi is being passed as it might be needed in the future. The operations are relatively light weight so they should add only a small overhead comapred to the digitisation without the radiation damage simulation - can be tested once all issues in this MR are addressed.
Caveats
For now, only dummy histograms are set. Only the planar sensor has the code implemented, not the 3D one, but it should be easy to implement it also for 3D once we address all issues.
Questions
Currently, the sensor digitisation code has 2 booleans, one which controls if the radiation damage simulation is used and if the template correction (this MR) is used. Furthermore, a new option has been added to the FrontEnd simulation code that control is the charge correction should be applied. Question 1: Should this be imroved somehow? The new option in the FrontEnd simulation should always be true if the template correction is used for the radiation damage - how should we approach this?
Question 2: Ideally, we should have one correction histogram per layer, but the number of layers is different in Pixel and ITk - currently the potions are hardcoded - but how should we deal woth this check at the initialisation?
cc @mbomben @tadej @llongo @tlari @stsuno @battagl
After dicussion with @mbomben we need to do it differently... closing the MR