atomic data (photoionization x-sections) for P

[kslong]

I was trying to add PV to our atomic data, but (at least for certain ionization modes, perhaps all) one requires photoionization x-sections. These are netierh in VKFY or Topbase

[kslong]

It looks like the necessary data may be in these papers.

Palmieri+16 - K-shell photoabsorption and photoionisation of trace elements. I. Isoelectronic sequences with electron number 3 ≤N ≤ 11

Mendoza+17 - K-shell photoabsorption and photoionization of trace elements. II. Isoelectronic sequences with electron number 12 ≤N ≤ 18

Mendoza+18 - K-shell photoabsorption and photoionization of trace elements. III. Isoelectronic sequences with electron number 19 ≤ N ≤ 26

and the database for this is here

http://cdsarc.u-strasbg.fr/viz-bin/cat?J/A+A/616/A62

[Higginbottom]

Hmmmm, OK. When the new data was put in, I certainly tried to keep the ethos going. The intention was that python would read in and default to Topbase PI data if the VFKY wasn't available. Is that not working?

[kslong]

Read my revised version of the issue. It wasn’t what I originally thought

…

Sent from my iPhone On Mar 17, 2020, at 3:53 AM, Higginbottom <notifications@github.com> wrote:  Hmmmm, OK. When the new data was put in, I certainly tried to keep the ethos going. The intention was that python would read in and default to Topbase PI data if the VFKY wasn't available. Is that not working? — You are receiving this because you were assigned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#674 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AATJ4VJQI3UOIZGHBVDXS6TRH43CBANCNFSM4LMUPVTQ>.

[Higginbottom]

Ah OK - do you want me to get it in then - or are you OK with putting it in the data repo?

Nick

[kslong]

For now, let me work on this. I may have questions to ask though, and ultimately I will add material to the data directory.

[kslong]

@Higginbottom So I have made some progress. What is currently happening with verner_2_py.py is that some but all of the x-sections in VY are being used. I also believe there are errors in the file vy_innershell_tab.data, which we use. It contains some x-sections for ions with z that are outside of the range 1-20 or 26. Additional of course, the inner shell x-sections for P are missing. The file that is attached is vy with a final column indicating whether a particular line is used. v means it was use to extend a vfky x-section, i means it's an inner shell transition included in the innershell_tab, and n means not used at all.

foo.txt

[kslong]

@Higginbottom There is now a new vesion verner_2_py.py called xverner_2_py.py, which attempts to deal with the x-sections in VY that were not included in the output previously, either as an addition to a VKFY x-section or as an outershell transition. This allowed me to run an O-Star model with PV. It's routine assumes that any VY transition not identified as an outer shell transition is an inner shell transition, which likely incorrect for atoms that have ion species with nelec not included in your table somehow. We should sort this out, because we will forget if we don;t deal with it in the near term.

[kslong]

@Higginbottom Is there any reason we should not remove the old structures for the VY x-sections and also the code which calculates the x-sections from the formulae, since everything now effectively read in as an array of values. (I have done this on a local branch and as far as I can telll it does not matter). Also, at this point, what is the essential difference between x-sections from the different sources. It must be something in the information we provide as "header" information, and or how they are used.

[kslong]

This is needed for the release paper