reorganize transient classes

[jlaehne]

Description of the change

Closes #115

Split Transient classes into 1D Transient and 2D TransientSpectrum classes. Add CommonTransient class for functionality that will work on the time axis.

In a separate PR, functionalities of LuminescenceSpectrum class that are important also for streak camera data, will need to be moved to CommonLuminescence.

Progress of the PR

• Change implemented (can be split into several points),
• docstring updated (if appropriate),
• added tests,
• added line to CHANGELOG.md,
• ready for review.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #118 (711b236) into main (afd9723) will increase coverage by 0.23%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #118      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   95.76%   96.00%   +0.23%     
==========================================
  Files          11       15       +4     
  Lines         591      626      +35     
==========================================
+ Hits          566      601      +35     
  Misses         25       25              

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
lumispy/signals/cl_transient.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
lumispy/signals/cl_transientspec.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
lumispy/signals/common_transient.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
lumispy/signals/luminescence_transient.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
lumispy/signals/luminescence_transientspec.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
lumispy/signals/pl_transient.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
lumispy/signals/pl_transientspec.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update afd9723...711b236. Read the comment docs.

[jordiferrero]

Thanks Jonas! Indeed, nobody has really used these classes quite yet (I am working on some functions for the PL transient 1D.

My only comment, following what @LMSC-NTappy said, is that I would rather keep the names close to the signal features and not the detector. So what about calling it cl_transient_1d or cl_transient_2d instead of transient and streak?
Maybe I am getting confused here, but streak implies a streak camera, right? Is there a way of getting 2d luminescence data with other detectors? Idk

[jlaehne]

Well, these are 'just' the file names and not the class names, which are e.g. `TransientSpec`, but I could do the same and use `transientspec` in the file names. I'm not aware of any other method to obtain spectrally resolved time traces.

[LMSC-NTappy]

Looks good to me!

Regarding time-resolved luminescence, I think it can be done using TCSPC and serial spectral acquisition, gated detectors or regular detectors and pump-probe experiment schemes. Not sure what is the dominant

Only suggetion: I think the file in the signals/ directory could be changed to reflect the new class names.

Cheers

Nicolas

[jlaehne]

Only suggetion: I think the file in the signals/ directory could be changed to reflect the new class names.

Done in 711b236

[ericpre]

I went back to the original discussion and add a comments in #5 (comment).
Based on this comment, I would simply suggest to remove the transient classes, for the following reasons:

• It is not clear, what they will be used for
• we should consider them when the need arise
• these signal_type can be added later without affecting the existing structure. Actually, already defining a structure could be annoying in the future, in case they needs to be changed!

[jordiferrero]

Thanks Eric.
Just to put this into context, we (I recall Duncan and me) created all these classes at the very beginning of LumiSpy to make sure we had a structured "vision" of what the package should look like. I agree no one has had time to dive deeper in the transient classes yet. So I am happy to clean up the package as I think the vision is clear :-)