New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add LPM effect for photopair, fixes for BremsLPM #336
Conversation
Change definition of eLpm_ to make it consistent with the SEB scheme
Use TestFiles which include the new changes
@@ -86,5 +95,21 @@ namespace crosssection { | |||
template <> struct ParametrizationId<PhotoPairKochMotz> { | |||
static constexpr size_t value = 1000000013; | |||
}; | |||
|
|||
// LPM effect object | |||
class PhotoPairLPM { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
do we really need this constructor with mol_density
, mass_density
, sum_charge
, eLPM
? Some variables are not really intuitive.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
eLPM
is a computationally expensive calculation that needs to be executed only once, so we should save it.
mol_density_
and sum_charge_
are medium variables. Since those are the only two variables we need for the calcluations, we save them to avoid saving the whole medium
in the PhotoPairLPM object. So I believe these three values are useful to save. Their names are just adopted from what they are called in the Medium
class (although I agree that the variable names are not always well-chosen, but for the sake of consistency, I would use the same names here).
mass_density_
is only used in the constructor, so I would agree that we don't need to save them as a private member of the object. But in my opinion, this is the only change I would make to the constructor.
Add tests for KochMotz parametrization to PhotoPair_TEST
As an additional validiation, I have created plots where I compare the new dEdx results to the results from Polityko et al: Note that the energies used in their paper only go up to 1e18 MeV, but it is sufficient to see that the agreement is now much better. |
New PR for #334 but with clean history.
This PR adds the LPM effect for pair production of electron-positron pairs by photons.
Furthermore, this PR fixes the following issues in the implementation of the LPM effect in Bremsstrahlung: