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

updated LQ sideband selection logic #124

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 28, 2025
Merged

updated LQ sideband selection logic #124

merged 2 commits into from
Feb 28, 2025

Conversation

DaGeibl
Copy link
Contributor

@DaGeibl DaGeibl commented Feb 27, 2025

This pull request changes how the LQ sideband are generated. Currently the peak is defined as 4.5 dep_sigma(value from calibration) around the literature value of the DEP. The sidebands lie between 4.5 and 9 sigma on both sides of the peak band. For Detectors with low resolution this can result in a case where the sidebands reach into the 212-Bi FEP. To avoid this, I moved the both sidebands to the energies below the DEP.

Plot of Detector with normal energy res:
l200-part01-cal-B00076C-energy_spectrum_lq_classifier

Plot of Detector with bad energy res before PR
l200-part01-cal-V08682A-energy_spectrum_lq_classifier

Plot of same Detector after PR
sideband

Also added with this PR is a recipe for the plot above, that can be implemented into the lq_processors

…ion; added plot recipe to monitor sidebandregions
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 27, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 19.14894% with 38 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 28.39%. Comparing base (2ba3dd2) to head (3632ef8).
Report is 8 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
ext/LegendSpecFitsRecipesBaseExt.jl 0.00% 33 Missing ⚠️
src/lqcut.jl 64.28% 5 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #124      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   28.52%   28.39%   -0.13%     
==========================================
  Files          37       37              
  Lines        3527     3564      +37     
==========================================
+ Hits         1006     1012       +6     
- Misses       2521     2552      +31     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@theHenks theHenks self-requested a review February 27, 2025 18:25
@theHenks theHenks added the bug Something isn't working label Feb 27, 2025
Copy link
Collaborator

@theHenks theHenks left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good. Did you test this on real data already?

@oschulz oschulz requested a review from Copilot February 28, 2025 08:52

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

@DaGeibl
Copy link
Contributor Author

DaGeibl commented Feb 28, 2025

@theHenks I think there is a GitHub issue, or I do sth Wrong. On my DaGeibl/Main Branch there is the pushed Committee That resolves Felix Comments. Of I Look at this PR i See That its still „Processing Updates“. Did you encounter sth Like That before?

@fhagemann
Copy link
Contributor

Some times a good old force push fixes things ^^

@theHenks theHenks merged commit 391ed7e into legend-exp:main Feb 28, 2025
10 of 12 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants