New hit finding integration window, same as 2023 Gains Calibration

[S81D]

Describe your changes

The 2023 Gains calibration employed a different integration window than what is the default for our event building / physics data. To ensure we're using the same hit finding integration window, a new option ("Fixed_2023_Gains") has been added. The key difference is:

• Default hit finding for event building ("dynamic"):
  Pulse integration window defined by crossing and un-crossing threshold. The pulse_start is defined as 5 samples before the threshold (baseline + 7 dc) crossing point. The pulse_stop is defined when the pulse returns to the baseline + sigma crossing point.

• Updated hit finding ("Fixed_2023_Gains"):
  Pulse integration window defined by crossing and un-crossing baseline, rather than threshold. The pulse_start is defined as 5 samples before the baseline + sigma crossing point. The pulse_stop is defined as 5 samples after the pulse returns to the baseline + sigma crossing point.

The end result is we capture slightly more charge per hit, since the integration windows are extended to the left and right by at least 5 samples. Bob recommended we should use the same integration window as the Gains calibration, as our SPE factors depend on that calibration. Looking at individual ADC traces, it also seems like we consistently grab more of the whole "pulse" (see photo attached); we capture the main peak + the reflection peaks, where as in the old hit finding we would often miss some of the reflection peaks.

Both techniques still identify the pulse in the same way: threshold crossing (baseline + 7 dc).

Checklist before submitting your PR

• This PR implements a single change (one new/modified Tool, or a set of changes to implement one new/modified feature)
• This PR alters the minimum number of files to affect this change
• [N/A] If this PR includes a new Tool, a README and minimal demonstration ToolChain is provided
• [N/A] If a new Tool/ToolChain requires model or configuration files, their paths are not hard-coded, and means of generating those files is described in the readme, with examples provided on /pnfs/annie/persistent
• [N/A] For every new usage, there is a reason the data must be on the heap
• [N/A] For every new there is a delete, unless I explicitly know why (e.g. ROOT or a BoostStore takes ownership)

Additional Material

Attached photo below highlights the difference in the integration windows. The black curve is an average of 1000 SPE pulses taken from the data (Red is Andrew's new Waveform simulator, ignore for now). We can see the new pulse integration approach grabs the entirety of the pulse (including some of the reflection peaks). We should also use the same pulse integration approach in our physics data as what was used during calibration.

For a thorough breakdown of the differences used in the Gains calibration vs the (old) default event building hit finding, see here and here (Gian's calibration slides).