-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25
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
Proton+Helium spectrum from DAMPE 2019 ICRC proceeding #145
Conversation
@moralejo thanks, that looks useful. However, I would probably go for a either a function or a interpolation class / instance instead of this lambda function. If you are fine with it, I will push the changes to this branch. Otherwise I can also open a PR targetting this branch. |
@moralejo Is this data available here maybe? |
No, I had tried that database already, but unsuccessfully: no He data for DAMPE or CALET. There is no refereed publication on this, perhaps that is the problem. There are He data from space detectors (like AMS), but at lower energies, or from balloons at the energies of our interest (ATIC, CREAM, Nucleon-KLEM). The p+He from the balloon experiments are in the same ballpark (within 15% or so) of the DAMPE spectrum from the ICRC proceeding. |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #145 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 86.86% 90.45% +3.58%
==========================================
Files 39 40 +1
Lines 1348 1393 +45
==========================================
+ Hits 1171 1260 +89
+ Misses 177 133 -44
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
Thanks @maxnoe for the improvements. I just removed quite a few unnecessary digits that I had included in the flux values, just to make it look a bit nicer. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Since there is no proper test available for these changes, I would also update examples/plot_spectra.py
(superimposing also the data points from DAMPE) and related documentation at the bottom of docs/examples.rst
@HealthyPear I am adding a test right now But updating the example is also a good point. |
…ainties are still way higher than that!)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Only small thing missing is to update docs/examples.rst
.
I also suggested to add the DAMPE points to show the level of interpolation, but probably it's a bit overkill (in that case we should do that for all curves and it seems too much).
The other curves are parametrized functions, there are no points to show. |
Sure, but they are still representing real data which can be found in the CR database if we want. |
No. We directly use the published (somewhere, not necessary a proper publication) parametrizations for all the others. The HEGRA / MAGIC spectra are the result of forward-folding, so there are no flux points corresponding to the spectrum. Interpolation is obviously different to fitting and we directly use the points. |
Today this popped out |
Added a proton+Helium spectrum from DAMPE (unfortunately I could only find a proceeding as reference for it: https://inspirehep.net/files/62efc8374ffced58ea7e3a333bfa1217).
It is useful for some real background data vs. MC proton comparisons in terms of absolute rates, since the data before g/h separation cuts contain mostly p and He. One should anyway keep in mind that He and proton showers (and hence images) differ, which is why residual hadronic background after g/h separation is mostly made of protons.