Fix/fill negatives gauss #113
Closed
Conversation
This file contains 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
added 7 commits
March 11, 2020 11:07
Fixed buggy fill negatives function and replaced it by a new method, ``` Fill negative channels with positive counts from neighboring channels. The idea is that the negative counts are somehow connected to the (γ-ray) resolution and should thus be filled from a channel within the resolution. This implementation loops through the closest channels with positive number of counts to fill the channle(s) with negative counts. Note that it can happen that some bins will remain with negative counts (if not enough bins with possitive counts are available within the window_size) . The routine is performed for each Ex row independently. ``` Additionally changed code of FirstGeneration and Unfoder to have easier access if someone want to replace the fill negatives function by a custom function
Increased default window size to 20. (arb. number) Additionally, corrected the window size to be the total window size (before it was actually twice as large as expected)
Routine now resembles the one in mama, let's study the impact
The array for the gaussian was messed up before
|
Will discuss this issue further with Ann-Cecilie, but for now I will pull this down due to the issues mentioned above. The version of just removing the negative counts seems more appropriate; although we might choose this here for the very first step, the subtracted background spectra. Note that the effects would also be very interesting to test for a low count spectrum, like in beta-decay. |
|
btw: This has of course a sigificant impact on the analyzed nld and gsf. Here is the comparison with the input data (for the version with the corrected likelihood, #112 ): product from the synthetic dataset: vs RAINIER (rebinned the same way): and the nld, gsf: |
fzeiser
pushed a commit
to fzeiser/ompy
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 19, 2020
This gave better results, see discussions in the PRs oslocyclotronlab#110 and oslocyclotronlab#113
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Similar to #110, but here we have the option to fill the negatives by smoothing with a (1D) gaussian, where the window size can be chosen in accordance with the FWHM.
However, when using this method on the synthetic dataset, one get's a significant and probably negative impact on the 1Gen spectra:
See spectrum on the right side (median of each bin for 50 realizations). Note that the middle pannel, the unfolded spectrum, still looks quite reasonable.
vs the "true" spectrum from RAINIER.
My impression is that the effect is larger for the synthetic spectra, but it would need more time to investigate.