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

ENH: support multiple scattering planes for KF #78

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 30, 2017
Merged

ENH: support multiple scattering planes for KF #78

merged 2 commits into from
Jun 30, 2017

Conversation

YannickDieter
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request is related to requested changes for additional scattering plane option for KF
ENH:

  • support of multiple scattering planes

MAINT:

  • change default case from None to False

  • remove redundant index_scatter

@YannickDieter YannickDieter mentioned this pull request Jun 19, 2017
39 tasks
Copy link
Collaborator

@DavidLP DavidLP left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

One question I have

z_scatter: z position of scattering plane in um
material_budget_scatter: material budget of scattering plane
alignment_scatter: list which contains alpha, beta and gamma angles of scattering plane.
If None, no rotation will be considered.
In case of multiple scattering planes, each value of a key is a list, with items corresponding to each scatterong plane.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Typo: scatterong

z_scatter: z position of scattering plane in um
material_budget_scatter: material budget of scattering plane
alignment_scatter: list which contains alpha, beta and gamma angles of scattering plane.
If None, no rotation will be considered.
In case of multiple scattering planes, each value of a key is a list, with items corresponding to each scatterong plane.
If whole dict is False, no scattering plane will be added.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If add_scattering_plane is false

dut_fit_selection[np.where(dut_fit_selection > (index_scatter - 1))[0][0]:] = dut_fit_selection[np.where(dut_fit_selection > (index_scatter - 1))[0][0]:] + 1
if add_scattering_plane:
for i in range(len(index_scatter)): # need to shift dut fit selection in case of additional scattering plane
dut_fit_selection[np.where(dut_fit_selection > (index_scatter[i] - 1))[0][0]:] = dut_fit_selection[np.where(dut_fit_selection > (index_scatter[i] - 1))[0][0]:] + 1
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since a scattering plane is no DUT I wonder why dut_fit_selection is changed.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This has also to be changed, since the dut_index is different if additional scattering planes are considered. E.g. if we want to use DUT 0 and 1 in fit, and add a scattering plane in between, the dut_indices are now: 0, 1 (scattering plane) and 2. Then dut_fit_selection has to be changed to dut_fit_selection = [0, 2] .

@DavidLP
Copy link
Collaborator

DavidLP commented Jun 30, 2017

Looks good to me!

@DavidLP DavidLP merged commit 7c8a940 into SiLab-Bonn:development Jun 30, 2017
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.

None yet

2 participants