-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 126
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Use MultiDomainFunction in IntegratePeaks1DProfile #38515
Draft
RichardWaiteSTFC
wants to merge
18
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
38439_use_MD_fitting_IntegratePeaks1DProfile
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Draft
Use MultiDomainFunction in IntegratePeaks1DProfile #38515
RichardWaiteSTFC
wants to merge
18
commits into
main
from
38439_use_MD_fitting_IntegratePeaks1DProfile
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Have defined min I/sig in input validator as 0.5 (previously 0)
need to be in ADS due to bug in issue #38476
Number edge pixels changed because previously any pixels on the detector edge attempted to be fitted would be classed as "on edge". Here we fit a much larger number of pixels, so the condition is updated to be only the successful fits (rather than all attempted)
Test was failing as initial guess was far from data - this was because hadn't mutliplied counts by bin-width when integrating
To do this offset the simulated peaks in one of the two pixels containing the peak - when the center is free to vary (unconstrained by the DIFC ratio or user imposed limits) in the final/second fit, the same solution will be reached. Hence the I/sig values unchanged, with one exception: I have updated the I/sig test value for Poisson fit - the final fit is still good, just slightly different.
Same constraint as used in main. Have needed to adjust I/sig of Gaussian unit test as bin-widths are quite large relative to FWHM. If you set fwhm_min -> 0.5 fwhm_min then get initial I/sig
In limit where FWHM comparabel to bin-width (which is about to be one of post-fit checks impose)
And loosen constrints on FWHM by factor 2
RichardWaiteSTFC
force-pushed
the
38439_use_MD_fitting_IntegratePeaks1DProfile
branch
from
December 18, 2024 15:28
a1a6322
to
7bb3bfc
Compare
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description of work
Summary of work
Fixes #xxxx.
Further detail of work
To test:
Reviewer
Please comment on the points listed below (full description).
Your comments will be used as part of the gatekeeper process, so please comment clearly on what you have checked during your review. If changes are made to the PR during the review process then your final comment will be the most important for gatekeepers. In this comment you should make it clear why any earlier review is still valid, or confirm that all requested changes have been addressed.
Code Review
Functional Tests
Does everything look good? Mark the review as Approve. A member of
@mantidproject/gatekeepers
will take care of it.Gatekeeper
If you need to request changes to a PR then please add a comment and set the review status to "Request changes". This will stop the PR from showing up in the list for other gatekeepers.