Add a material-agnostic new-experiment runbook#9
Merged
Conversation
Starting on a dataset the pipeline has never seen previously meant re-deriving the same sequence by hand. NEW_EXPERIMENT_RUNBOOK.md makes it a doc that can be followed from an experiment folder and a material name: survey the folder (measured raster, not folder names; HDF5 layout; peak density regime), decide which analyses the material system actually supports, configure, index, run the chain, report. The decision table is the point: Ti/Zr get Burgers parent-beta, steels need K-S/N-W, single-phase materials skip chain steps 6-8 entirely, and four checks apply regardless of material (null measured on this scan, contiguity-aware grain counts, tolerance sensitivity, corroboration tested against chance). Section 6 lists every analysis script that still hard-codes Ti-6Al-4V lattice constants or valid_hkls_Ti_*.csv, by file and line, plus the phase-name -> symmetry mapping and the single function holding the orientation relationship. None of these error when left alone; the nulls are simply computed against the wrong reflection list and look healthy. Also corrects the README's claim that nothing in the directory is experiment-specific -- true of the indexer, not of the analysis scripts.
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Starting on a dataset the pipeline has never seen previously meant re-deriving the same sequence by hand.
scripts/pipeline/NEW_EXPERIMENT_RUNBOOK.mdmakes it a doc that can be followed from an experiment folder and a material name.Six phases: survey the experiment folder → decide what science the material system supports → configure → index → analyse → report, plus a porting section.
What makes it more than a checklist:
/entry1/data/data), the real raster from the stage coordinates (the 45° mount makes a10x10umfolder a 20×20 µm region), the ≥4 px area filter that separates reflections from single-pixel noise spikes, and a peaks/frame → density-regime table.valid_hkls_Ti_*.csv, by file and line (10 scripts), the phase-name → symmetry mapping, and the single function holding the orientation relationship (parentbeta_reconstruct.py:49burgers_Cv()→(12,3,3); downstream code is generic in that array, but the 11/12 accept cut must be re-derived from the synthetic gate for K-S). None of these error if left alone — the nulls are simply computed against the wrong reflection list and look perfectly healthy.Also corrects the pipeline README's claim that nothing in the directory is experiment-specific: true of the indexer, not of the analysis scripts.
Docs only; no code paths touched.