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

[WIP] Include validation for LST-1 Crab analysis #151

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

morcuended
Copy link

@morcuended morcuended commented Oct 17, 2024

Added make.py script to perform the 1D analysis of LST-1 Crab data from Zenodo. Since we use the energy-dependent angular cuts, we cannot use the HLI analysis interface. So here I follow the low-level API.

To be done:

  • Include benchmarks for LST-1 analysis (gzipped vs unzipped files)
  • Plotting validation results.
  • Unify the paths to the same structure as other analyses.
  • Include it in the workflow as the rest of the analysis validations.
  • Add README.

Question: Which should be the reference model and flux points to compare with?

@AtreyeeS
Copy link
Member

Question: Which should be the reference model and flux points to compare with?

Maybe the ones from the validation paper? But that uses a lot more data, so I am not sure.

You can maybe also add this to the benchmarks. I remember we had performance issues with the LST that were then resolved, so would be good to ensure that we dont reintroduce them

@morcuended
Copy link
Author

morcuended commented Oct 18, 2024

Thanks, @AtreyeeS. I'll use the ones from the LST-1 performance paper as reference values and include the analysis in the benchmarks.

Internal note: the comparison cannot be directly done between both results. IRFs used for the LST-1 performance paper (for each DL3 file we used an IRF produced from MC performed in the nearest pointing node simulated) are different from the ones included in this DL3 Crab released (IRFs are interpolated between singular IRFs produced in different pointing positions).

Copy link
Contributor

@registerrier registerrier left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @morcuended . This looks nice.

This should be run in two steps? First to download and then to run the analysis? You could add an option on run-analysis to perform data download in all cases.

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.

3 participants