Change benchmark from `tilt_sector` and `input_tilt_sector` to `tilt_subsector` and `input_tilt_subsector` respectively

[kalashsinghal]

• Closes #797

Dear @maurolepore,

As per the new requirement, we have to change the benchmark from tilt_sector and input_tilt_sector to tilt_subsector and input_tilt_subsector respectively. Please review this change asap. Thanks!

cc @Tilmon @AnneSchoenauer

---

TODO

• [x] Link related issue/PR.
• [x] Describe the goal of the PR. Avoid details that are clear in the diff.
• [x] Mark the PR as draft.
• [x] Include a unit test.
• [x] Review your own PR in "Files changed".
• [x] Ensure the PR branch is updated.
• [x] Ensure the checks pass.
• [x] Change the status from draft to ready.
• [x] Polish the PR description to reflect what it ended up doing.
• [x] Polish the PR title as you'd like others to read it from the git log.
• [x] Assign a reviewer.
• [x] Document user-facing changes in the changelog.

[kalashsinghal]

@maurolepore I can see that there are some workflows which are failing in Github Actions . Do I need to make any change in other packages as well for making this change?

[Tilmon]

@maurolepore

ml02. In the original issue by @Tilmon I see he refers only to emissions_profile() but this PR seems to also affect emissions_profile_upstream().

Yes, it does also affect emission_profile_upstream(), but we don't need this change now. We won't use upstream results right now. I.e., if implementing it for the emission_profile_upstream() costs extra time, we should leave it out for now and change it at a later stage. For now, we only need results for the indicators that are not upstream.

[maurolepore]

Thanks @Tilmon

It's actually less work to do it for both than for one indicator alone.