Add powheg-box-v2 lhe testfiles

[APN-Pucky]

LHE files for several POWHEG-BOX-V2 processes https://powhegbox.mib.infn.it/ (process details are in the papers for specific process listed on their webpage)

The specific powheg run parameter are included in the beginning comment of the lhe files and correspond to the testrun configurations provided with the powheg box code.

This does not include all processes available, but only a descriptive subset of different setups and processes:

• pylhe-testfile-powheg-box-v2-W.lhe - W NLO production process
• pylhe-testfile-powheg-box-v2-Z.lhe - Z NLO production process
• pylhe-testfile-powheg-box-v2-Zj.lhe - Z+j NLO production process
• pylhe-testfile-powheg-box-v2-directphoton.lhe - gamma+j NLO production process
• pylhe-testfile-powheg-box-v2-hvq.lhe - open heavy quark NLO production process
• pylhe-testfile-powheg-box-v2-trijet.lhe - j+j+j NLO production process

For https://github.com/scikit-hep/pylhe/pull/220

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Comparison is base (a3d7245) 69.78% compared to head (129628b) 69.78%. Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #135 +/- ## ======================================= Coverage 69.78% 69.78% ======================================= Files 3 3 Lines 139 139 ======================================= Hits 97 97 Misses 42 42 ```

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[eduardo-rodrigues]

Hi. For reference can you edit the top-level box to explain what the various files are? This is useful for the future.

This is a very useful addition and we should merge and release. WDYT @jpivarski?

[APN-Pucky]

oh, yes that makes sense. Done.

[eduardo-rodrigues]

@all-contributors please add @APN-Pucky for data.

[allcontributors[bot]]

@eduardo-rodrigues

I've put up a pull request to add @APN-Pucky! :tada:

[jpivarski]

You already merged it, but yes this is good.

[eduardo-rodrigues]

Thanks and sorry for the rush, Jim. It was a crazy day and I acted where I could when I had a bit of time. Dunno if you have anything else in the pipeline or if you would be happy to make a new release to finalise the enhancement in pylhe? Advance thanks.

[jpivarski]

I'm glad you went ahead without waiting for me. Adding a few kilobyte-sized files to support pylhe is definitely a good use of this repo.

[eduardo-rodrigues]

@jpivarski, I'm not sure if you've been doing anything special for the releases but I tagged https://github.com/scikit-hep/scikit-hep-testdata/releases/tag/v0.4.36 and it's not yet on PyPI after 5 minutes or so, which is strange.

[jpivarski]

You have to make a GitHub release to trigger PyPI deployment, not just a tag. When you make a GitHub release, you can use this existing tag, though.

[eduardo-rodrigues]

Thanks. But I thought that is what I did at https://github.com/scikit-hep/scikit-hep-testdata/releases? I'm confused as I proceeded as I do for Particle and DecayLanguage. Some setting must be different. If you see the issue, can you fix?

[jpivarski]

You're right, and I was looking for this thread (on my phone) to follow up, but couldn't find it. I see the release, so it should have triggered. But also, I don't even see the GitHub Action for it in the actions tab or its definition in .github/workflows. I know this has had a GitHub release-triggered deployment, because that's how I've always done it.

[eduardo-rodrigues]

Thanks for the check. Strange indeed.

In the meantime the conda release got done and merged, see https://github.com/conda-forge/scikit-hep-testdata-feedstock/pull/53.

[eduardo-rodrigues]

I decided to upload manually to PyPI to get this done.