-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 272
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
Muon parameters update #2670
Draft
jstvdk
wants to merge
12
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
muon-parameters-update
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and old review comments may become outdated.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
Muon parameters update #2670
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
12 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
6d55373
Added fields to the MuonParametersContainer
jstvdk a1ab58a
Added methods to calculate new fields
jstvdk 385e039
Added tests for new muon feature methods
jstvdk dca7ff8
Added processing of the new features during muon analysis
jstvdk 69b496a
Fixed lint issues
jstvdk a54658a
Updated field naming in the muon parameter containers
jstvdk d2677d9
Updated doc string in muon parameters container
jstvdk 87831c1
Proper variables naming to be consistent with recent changes in conta…
jstvdk d1924ad
Update of muon processor with new muon parameters field names
jstvdk 68d291b
Doc string update for ring size parameters
jstvdk 81fecaa
Better units conversion in radial light distribution method
jstvdk 6140d30
Resolving problem of unit inconsistency nan vs int
jstvdk File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is this the same as l1201 of
ctapipe.containers
? If so, why the docstrings are different?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
They are the same, but I didn't want to duplicate the exact same text.
Or should I just duplicate the doc strings from
ctapipe.containers
into the doc strings in the methods fromctapipe.image.muon.features
?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Perhaps this function simply should return
MuonParametersContainer
?Also, the number of input parameters is very high, consider to wrap them into a structure (dict, container, ...)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
All this module in fact is returning just one
MuonParametersContainer
and I adopted already existing style where each method returning some logically/technically connected part ofMuonParametersContainer
. Should I reconsider this and return calculated parts ofMuonParametersContainer
from every method?Good point