Skip to content
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

full LEFT beta function added #94

Draft
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

full LEFT beta function added #94

wants to merge 7 commits into from

Conversation

jasonaebischerGIT
Copy link
Collaborator

Here the beta function in the LEFT, including all terms.

@jasonaebischerGIT
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Goes together with PR #93

Copy link
Collaborator

@peterstangl peterstangl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I have made some small changes such that the beta functions can be used with the current WCxf basis definition. In particular, I have

  • commented out the beta functions of all undefined operators
  • set all undefined Wilson coefficients to zero
  • defined the Kronecker delta inside the function beta

Since the new file added in this PR does not interfere with anything else in wilson, but is necessary both for PR #93 and for my plan to automatically extract the ADMs from the beta functions, I think this PR can be merged already.

@jackypheno
Copy link
Collaborator

Yes maybe its good idea to merge it!

@jackypheno
Copy link
Collaborator

@jasonaebischerGIT @peterstangl I think still the shape of the Kronecker delta needs to be adjusted for up-type (2 flavours) and down-type (3-flavours).

@jackypheno
Copy link
Collaborator

@jasonaebischerGIT @peterstangl I think still the shape of the Kronecker delta needs to be adjusted for up-type (2 flavours) and down-type (3-flavours).

OK, I probably this can be handled by using pad_C method.

@peterstangl
Copy link
Collaborator

@jackypheno yes exactly, you can use the pad_C method. The beta function can be used as follows:

import numpy as np
from wilson.test_wilson import get_random_wc
from wilson.util import wetutil
from wilson.run.wet.beta import beta

# generate some wcxf input
wc = get_random_wc('WET', 'JMS', 90)

# turn WCxf Wilson coefficients into symmetrized arrays (the redundant basis)
C = wetutil.wcxf2arrays_symmetrized(wc.dict)

# add the SM parameters (here I just set them all to 1)
C = {**C,**{k: 1 if v==1 else np.ones(v) for k,v in wetutil._dim4_keys_shape.items()}}

# pad with zeros to bring all arrays to full 3-generation shape (needed for u-type quarks)
C = wetutil.pad_C(C)

# evaluate the beta functions
result = beta(C)

# unpad the result to remove zeros and bring all arrays to their canonical shape
result = wetutil.unpad_C(result)

@jackypheno
Copy link
Collaborator

@jackypheno yes exactly, you can use the pad_C method. The beta function can be used as follows:

import numpy as np
from wilson.test_wilson import get_random_wc
from wilson.util import wetutil
from wilson.run.wet.beta import beta

# generate some wcxf input
wc = get_random_wc('WET', 'JMS', 90)

# turn WCxf Wilson coefficients into symmetrized arrays (the redundant basis)
C = wetutil.wcxf2arrays_symmetrized(wc.dict)

# add the SM parameters (here I just set them all to 1)
C = {**C,**{k: 1 if v==1 else np.ones(v) for k,v in wetutil._dim4_keys_shape.items()}}

# pad with zeros to bring all arrays to full 3-generation shape (needed for u-type quarks)
C = wetutil.pad_C(C)

# evaluate the beta functions
result = beta(C)

# unpad the result to remove zeros and bring all arrays to their canonical shape
result = wetutil.unpad_C(result)

Yes! It has been implemented already in #93 !

@dvandyk
Copy link
Collaborator

dvandyk commented Feb 22, 2024

@peterstangl You approved this PR but never merged it. Is there a particular reason?

@peterstangl peterstangl marked this pull request as draft April 23, 2024 16:27
@peterstangl
Copy link
Collaborator

@peterstangl You approved this PR but never merged it. Is there a particular reason?

Sorry @dvandyk I somehow overlooked your message. This PR was originally made to assist fixing issue #54 and was also needed for PR #93. Issue #54 has been fixed without needing to merge this PR and #93 did not have any activity for more than two years. The code in this PR is not used anywhere in wilson, so I think there is not really a point in adding it. It might be useful to have it in the future, so I think we could keep the PR open, but I now marked it as a draft.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants