{{ message }}

# Add ECPL model, energy flux and integration methods #641

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Jul 22, 2016
Merged

# Add ECPL model, energy flux and integration methods#641

merged 2 commits into from Jul 22, 2016

## Conversation

### adonath commented Jul 21, 2016

 This PR adds an ECPL model, energy flux and integration methods to SpectralModel. I've changed the latex formulae to be consistent with the HGPS paper. I.e using \phi for differential, F for integral and G for energy flux. @joleroi Is there an ECPL model in sherpa that could be used in to_sherpa()?
 Add ECPL model, energy flux and integration functions 
 1791f79 
 @@ -34,7 +34,6 @@ 'power_law_pivot_energy', 'power_law_df_over_f', 'power_law_flux', 'power_law_energy_flux',

#### cdeil Jul 21, 2016 Member

Please don't remove this now. This breaks other parts in Gammapy and other scripts:
https://ci.appveyor.com/project/cdeil/gammapy/build/1.0.1122/job/4ki3h7p55hew82pn#L1157
I'll remove it later.

### cdeil commented Jul 21, 2016

 Please auto-format the code in gammapy/spectrum/models.py (PEP8 stuff) Concerning the API, can we please change to energy_band instead of emin and emax as separate parameters? Im my experience this is a little more convenient for users, to have fewer objects. It's also used e.g. here and here
added the feature label Jul 21, 2016
added this to the 0.5 milestone Jul 21, 2016
self-assigned this Jul 21, 2016

### cdeil commented Jul 21, 2016

 For Sherpa models, we should just do what @zblz started here (https://github.com/zblz/naima/blob/master/naima/sherpa_models.py#L74) and define our own Sherpa models. Yes, a few of the ones we want are built-in, but they don't have the same parameter names and sometimes not the same parametrisation. So just putting our own seems easiest to me.
 Pep8 fixes 
 d67aa5c 

### adonath commented Jul 22, 2016

 @cdeil Thanks! I've addressed your comments. Concerning the sherpa models: I just had a quick look at the spectral models in sherpa and couldn't find an exponential cut off (except as xspec model, but with different parametrization and only available when xspec is installed...). For now I'll leave the to_sherpa() method unimplemented for the ExponentialCutoffPowerLaw model.

### cdeil commented Jul 22, 2016

 For now I'll leave the to_sherpa() method unimplemented for the ExponentialCutoffPowerLaw model. 👍 Merge?
merged commit 12abcd5 into gammapy:master Jul 22, 2016
2 checks passed
2 checks passed
continuous-integration/appveyor/pr AppVeyor build succeeded
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details

### joleroi commented Jul 25, 2016

 @adonath I think the XSPEC exponential cutoff PL is all that's there. So I agree that it's best to write down our own version/parametrization of the ECPL as @cdeil suggested.
deleted the adonath:spectral_model_improvements branch Nov 20, 2018