SR1 offline simulation strax context

[shenyangshi]

Before you submit this PR: make sure to put all operations-related information in a wiki-note, a PR should be about code and is publicly accessible

What does the code in this PR do / what does it improve?

Create a xedocs based simulation context using the exact corrections as real data. Simplify the logics.

Can you briefly describe how it works?

1. Create a plain vanilla strax context
2. Overwrite raw_records with wfsim raw_records
3. Overwrite xedocs url config with a specific run's of the user's choice
4. Add simulation needed configs in the strax config

Can you give a minimal working example (or illustrate with a figure)?

Please include the following if applicable:

• Update the docstring(s)
• Update the documentation
• Tests to check the (new) code is working as desired.
• Does it solve one of the open issues on github?

Notes on testing

• Until the automated tests pass, please mark the PR as a draft.
• On the XENONnT fork we test with database access, on private forks there is no database access for security considerations.

All italic comments can be removed from this template.

[shenyangshi]

https://github.com/XENONnT/cutax/pull/296

[ramirezdiego]

Thanks, @shenyangshi, it looks good to me, with a couple of comments for the future:

1. I wonder if, although ugly (as is already the case), we could have integrated this new context options in the existing structure of xenonnt_simulation, since anyway the final usable context goes into cutax,
2. We need to study the simulations case scenarios and rethink the (effectively deprecated) options to jump from processing to simulation configs and back, i.e., the current

        cmt_run_id_sim=None,
        cmt_run_id_proc=None,
        cmt_version='global_ONLINE',
        fax_config='fax_config_nt_design.json',
        overwrite_from_fax_file_sim=False,
        overwrite_from_fax_file_proc=False,
        ...

Let's anyway not complicate our lifes for the moment :) I'll let @dachengx merge.

[shenyangshi]

Hi @ramirezdiego, thanks! I indeed thought about rewriting the xenonnt_simulation, but I don't want to break existing code that uses the cmt options a lot.

About the extra kwargs, I also thought about including them in the new context, but the namings are complex and even I cannot remember which is which. Maybe a better idea of the same comlexity is to modify st.config directly after setting up the context.

[dachengx]

Hi @ramirezdiego, thanks! I indeed thought about rewriting the xenonnt_simulation, but I don't want to break existing code that uses the cmt options a lot.

About the extra kwargs, I also thought about including them in the new context, but the namings are complex and even I cannot remember which is which. Maybe a better idea of the same comlexity is to modify st.config directly after setting up the context.

I agree that we should keep the old simulation context unchanged, because of the backward compatibility requirement.

[dachengx]

@shenyangshi Can this new context also be used on SR0?

[shenyangshi]

Can this new context also be used on SR0?

Yes it can, if you give a SR0 run id and pick the SR0 fax_config.

[FaroutYLq]

Hi @dachengx. Can we merge this and release v2.1.3 today?

[dachengx]

Would you add tests of the new context? Like:

straxen/tests/test_contexts.py

Line 140 in a1eadc4

return straxen.contexts.xenonnt_simulation(*args, **kwargs)

. @shenyangshi

[shenyangshi]

@dachengx I think you can merge now.

[dachengx]

Hi @dachengx. Can we merge this and release v2.1.3 today?

Will merge if the test passes. Will release v2.1.3 if this is merged today.