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

Correct mag values for paper_candidates #7

Open
tylerbarna opened this issue Aug 15, 2022 · 0 comments
Open

Correct mag values for paper_candidates #7

tylerbarna opened this issue Aug 15, 2022 · 0 comments
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation help wanted Extra attention is needed

Comments

@tylerbarna
Copy link
Owner

When creating formatted files for the pipeline to automatically process the paper candidates, I was unsure whether "magpsf" or "magzpsci" corresponded to the correct data to use as the "mag" variable.

@tylerbarna tylerbarna added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation help wanted Extra attention is needed labels Aug 15, 2022
tylerbarna added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 15, 2022
I created reformatted versions of the csv files for the paper to more closely match the standard ingested format, as I noticed only one file was properly imported. I think this might have something to do with the way two of the provided csv files were formatted in that they had a different order for the data and different column labels. This *might* have something to do with the way data is processed in the nmma package (see [this function](https://github.com/nuclear-multimessenger-astronomy/nmma/blob/3f5a43c82649808af148945c0a03b6288939fd87/nmma/em/utils.py#L201)  which is referenced [here](https://github.com/nuclear-multimessenger-astronomy/nmma/blob/3f5a43c82649808af148945c0a03b6288939fd87/nmma/em/analysis.py#L471) in analysis.py), but I'd have to investigate the specific behavior in more depth.

This also exposes an issue with how candidate names for data are processed in nmma_fitter, which I have submitted as an [issue](#5). As a stopgap in this case, I've simply removed the second underscore in the formatted file

As for the actual Reformatting, I need to double check whether the correct data is being labelled as mag and mag_unc in this instance; I renamed "magpsf" to "mag" and "sigmapsf" to "mag_unc" though I'm not sure if I should be using the "magzpsci" and "magzpsciunc" columns in this instance. Additionally, these files do not contain an equivalent to limmag as far as I could identify. I've submitted it as an issue [here](#7)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation help wanted Extra attention is needed
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant