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

Problem loading references generated by automatic instrument calibration #161

Open
christophkern opened this issue May 9, 2023 · 0 comments
Labels

Comments

@christophkern
Copy link
Contributor

There is a bug in the software that occurs when you "Enable automatic instrument calibration from measured spectra" in the 'Calibration' settings of an instrument. Enabling the feature automatically generates reference cross sections as desired, but when these are automatically loaded into the instrument's 'Evaluation' settings, the 'Name' in the list of reference files changes from a simple identifier (e.g., SO2) to a more complex string (e.g., SO2_Bogumil_295K). These new, more complex names are then used in the column headers above the respective fit results in the EvaluationLog. Once this happens, the software apparently no longer understands which fit results to use when identifying plumes, determining plume locations, or calculating the 'plume completeness' parameter. There is never a vertical line indicating a plume center in the scan, the real-time plume completeness is always set to -999, and all real-time derived fluxes are set to 0. 
Interestingly, the software is able to identify the SO2 column density when doing Post-Flux analysis. Everything works fine in the "Flux" calculation dialog, so Post-Flux processing is still possible. However, some observatories rely on the real-time fluxes, at least as a preliminary product, so not having those is a major issue for them. For now, they have been instructed to simply uncheck the "Enable automatic instrument calibration from measured spectra" box and use the default references in the fit. But this is a nice new feature so it's a shame not to be able to use it.

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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant